





































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































•• 






% 
























































£ : . 













































































































































































































































■ • 


















































’ 












































- 












































































61 st Congress, j 

SENATE. 

J Document 

1st Session. ) 


| No.68,Pt.2 


W.s. J.|.M 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


M E S S A G E 


0 u 

3 ?/ 


FROM THE 

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, 

TRANSMITTING, 

IN FURTHER RESPONSE TO RESOLUTION NO. 51, BY SENATOR LA 
FOLLETTE, OF MAY 25, 1909, A LETTER FROM THE ACTING SEC¬ 
RETARY OF STATE WITH ACCOMPANYING PAPERS FURNISHED 
BY THE GERMAN GOVERNMENT ON THE SUBJECT OF WAGES 
PAID TO GERMAN WORKMEN. 


May 29, 1909.—Read; referred to the Committee on Finance, and ordered to be 

printed. 


To the Senate : 

In further response to the resolution adopted by the Senate on 
the 25th instant, requesting the President, if not incompatible in 
his judgment with the public interests, to transmit to the Senate the 
statement of the German Government or its officers in relation to the 
wages paid to German workmen, I transmit herewith the documents 
furnished by the German Government on the subject, which this day 
were returned by the Committee on Finance of the Senate to the De¬ 
partment of State. 

The attention of the Senate is invited to the statement in the accom¬ 
panying report of the Acting Secretary of State that these documents 
were obtained upon the understanding that the names of manufac¬ 
turers were to be held confidential and that the information furnished 
will not be made the basis of administrative action. 

Wm. H. Taft. 

The White House, May 28,1909. 


Department of State, 

Washington, May 28,1909. 

Since the transmission to you this morning of my report of May 
26, 1909, in response to the resolution of the Senate dated May 25, 
1909, requesting the President, if not incompatible in his judgment 

btrlW Z- 









2 


WAGES IN GERMANY. A (Ls 

\* 0 , 

with the public interests, to transmit to the Senate the statement of 
the German Government or its officers in relation to the wages paid 
to German workmen, the papers which were on the 3d and 13th of 
April, 1909, transmitted to the Committee on Finance of the Senate, 
have been returned to this department by the committee. I have the 
honor, therefore, to submit them herewith to the end that, if your 
judgment approve thereof, they may be transmitted to the Senate in 
compliance with its resolution. 

The information contained in the papers was furnished by the 
German Government upon the understanding that the names of man¬ 
ufacturers were to be held confidential and that the information 
given would not be made the basis of administrative action. Accord¬ 
ingly, by an understanding with the Committee on Finance the names 
of manufacturers had been for convenience elided. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Huntington Wilson, 

Acting Secretary of State - 

The President. 


Schedule A. —Chemicals. 

TETRACHLORID OF TIN. 

[Pamphlet 26, p. 3646.] 

The following statement has been made to the Union for the Pro¬ 
tection of the Interests of the German Chemical Industry: 

Mr. George R. Bower, an American who is interested in the sub¬ 
ject, wishes to have a specific duty of 5^ cents per pound (equivalent 
to about 30 per cent ad valorem) substituted in place of the present 
ad valorem duty of 25 per cent on anhydrous liquid tetrachlorid of 
tin. The statements made by Mr. Bower, and further on also by 
the Henry Bower Chemical Manufacturing Company, a firm rep¬ 
resented by him, regarding the status and vital conditions of this 
branch of industry, are for the most part incorrect. This applies in 
the first place to the statements regarding the cost of labor, which is 
said to be 100 per cent dearer in America than in Germany. A simi¬ 
lar false statement to the effect that the cost of labor in "the Ameri¬ 
can chemical industry is 100 to 150 per cent higher than in Germany 
occurs also in another place. These statements a,re due to an absolute 
ignorance of actual conditions. According to the experience of Ger¬ 
man firms which have branches in the United States, the wages paid 
in Germany as compared with those paid in the United States 
should only be estimated at about 50 per cent lower. The Henry 
Bower Manufacturing Company has proposed a specific duty of 5J 
cents per pound in lieu of the proposed ad valorem duty, claiming 
that this rate would "be equivalent to an ad valorem duty of 25 per 
cent, taking as a basis a price of 22 cents per pound. However, the 
price thus taken as a basis is not correct, as the price of tetrachlorid 
of tin, according to information furnished us by expert authority, 
was about 19 cents (in December of last year), delivered free at the 
place of consumption in America. 

X\. OF 



WAGES IN GERMANY. 


3 


CREOSOTE AND GUAIACOL. 

[Pamphlet 17, p. 2003.] 

The American T ariff Hearings contain a request by an American 
factory, the Northern Chemical Works, of Whitefield, N. H., to in¬ 
crease the present ad valorem duty of 25 per cent on beech wood creo¬ 
sote to 25 cents per pound English, and on guaiacol to 50 cents. 
These products were first furnished in sufficient purity for medical 
use by German manufacturers in 1882. The imports to America 
come chiefly from Germany. 

The specific duty of 25 cents per pound on creosote, as now re¬ 
quested by our new American competitors, is equal to 2.32 marks per 
kilogram. The present price of creosote is 2.95 marks per kilo¬ 
gram, shipped from Hanover. The duty asked, therefore, amounts 
to 80 per cent of the present value of the goods and in the case of 
guaiacol, a petty article, about 60 per cent. Creosote and guaiacol 
are petty medicinal articles the sale of which is rendered very diffi¬ 
cult by excessive competition. The present price of creosote is there¬ 
fore very unprofitable and can not continue any length of time. 
Normally, the price ought to be at least 4 marks per kilogram. Then 
the present ad valorem duty paid to the Americans would be 1 mark, 
to which would be added about 30 pfennigs for freight. The Ameri¬ 
cans would thus be ahead of the German imports by 1.30 marks, or 
about 30 per cent, even under the present tariff, an amount of protec¬ 
tion with which they should be very well satisfied. 

The Americans suspect that German importers quote prices at the 
custom-house which are far below the actual value. We must posi¬ 
tively refute this as quite impossible. The consular invoices and the 
American customs officials, who keep very accurately informed on 
German market prices, afford a guaranty of the correctness of the 
declarations. 

The figures quoted by our American competitors are not correct, 
nor is the statement that the name creosote is one of broad applica¬ 
tion. Beechwood creosote is an exact and restrictive term. There is 
none of this substance at 1 cent or $2 a pound. The wholesale price 
of beechwood creosote is much lower than given. The prices, given 
too high, were invented in order to give a show of justification to the 
exorbitant duty demanded. 



ANILINE DYES. 

[Schedule A, No. 15.] 

The Chamber of Commerce at Dusseldorf transmits the following 
reply to the statements of Doctor Schollkopf regarding the aniline- 
dye industry (pamphlet 2, p. 59 et seq.) : 

Table A: These figures have been chosen quite arbitrarily. For 
the factory cited as an example in the United States, consisting of 
83 laborers, 8 chemists, a good-sized commercial bureau, chemical 
and coloring laboratories, and warehouses, the buildings can not be 
erected in Germany for $60,000 (252,000 marks), and not even for 
$100,000 (420,000 marks), which is the amount given by Schollkopf 
as being required to build them in America. Generally speaking, 


4 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


building is considerably cheaper in the United States than in Ger¬ 
many. Although wages are dearer, nevertheless it is a custom there 
to use lumber almost exclusively in these structures. Only in the 
rarest cases are requirements made for beauty of appearance; there 
are no local police regulations in the regions in question; and there 
are also no formalities necessary for procuring licenses. The ex¬ 
pensive clothing rooms and dining and bath rooms found in German 
chemical factories are unknown over there. 

Sites suitable for aniline-dye factories are rare in Germany, and 
consequently expensive. The establishment of chemical factories in 
America is very easy, as complaints against molestation and contami¬ 
nation of water courses are settled in civil courts. At all events, the 
assumption that suitable land can be found in Germany for $50,000 
is pure imagination. 

“ Machinery and tools.” The prices of these could with equal 
justification be reduced to half or doubled. In view of the great 
number of aniline colors, which are produced by entirely different 
processes of manufacture, nothing reliable regarding the cost of the 
apparatus can be given. The wooden receptacles most often used 
(vats, boxes) are cheaper in America, owing to the cheaper price of 
lumber. 

Table B: The figures given under this head can only be followed 
out in so far as they relate to help which can at all times be replaced, 
“ obtainable in the open labor market.” Much different salaries are 
paid in Germany for special work. On the other hand, a general 
manager is not necessary in a factory of 83 workmen. It is to be 
supposed that this position represents the earnings of the owner of 
the busines or of a partner, the firm of Schollkopf, Hartford & 
Hanna Company, being itself a family concern whose principal 
member is Doctor Schollkopf. (The whole table is evidently based 
on this firm.) The amount given as the salary for chemists is too 
little, even those just out of the university receiving over $600 a year. 
By “ dyers ” must be meant colorists, who are not mentioned else¬ 
where and who are classed on an equal footing in Germany with 
well paid chemists. For $390 untrained laborers can hardly be ob¬ 
tained, not to speak of trained dyers on whom very great require¬ 
ments are placed in aniline-dye works. Clerks at $400 or even $350 
are unknown in the German aniline-dye industry, as a good educa¬ 
tion and a familiarity with foreign languages are absolutely required. 

Equally unreliable are Schollkopf’s statements regarding the 
wages of trained workmen (machinists, etc.) and ordinary laborers. 
These wages have continually and considerably increased in Ger¬ 
many within but recent years. 

Table C: The figures can hardly be verified as to their accuracy 
[which year?]. Many prices very high; indeed, this is also the 
case in the column “cost in Germany.” For instance, nitrite soda, 
given by Schollkopf at 60 marks, has been purchasable in Germany 
for years for about 50 marks per 100 kilograms. As is known, 
caustic and ammoniac soda are also rendered dear in Germany by 
import duties. The organic products can rather be bought more 
cheaply in America, where the more important are free of duty. 

Table D: Schollkopf admits himself that coal is cheaper in America 
than in Germany. The calculation of interest on the capital, which 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


5 


is estimated too high in Table A, may be disposed of in accordance 
with -what was said above. That the payments to be made on loans 
will be higher than in the case of better constructed buildings is easily 
understood. Likewise the fire insurance on frame buildings will be 
higher than in Germany on solid structures. At least 6,000 marks 
would have to be calculated for the laborers’ insurance on 83 laborers, 
insurance against sickness, etc., in Germany, without taking into con¬ 
sideration the very prevalent voluntary insurance of laborers against 
accidents outside the factories and against death. Taxes are higher 
in Germany. 

Schollkopf speaks of two big combinations. “ There used to be a 
dozen, but they have combined.” This is really incorrect. Besides 
the two combinations (1) Bad. Aniline and Soda Factory, Ludwigs- 
hafen, Elberfeld Dye Works, and the Aniline Manufacturing Com¬ 
pany, Berlin, and (2) Hochst Dye Works, Leop, Cassella & Co., and 
Ivalle & Co., there are a whole lot of other aniline dye factories, such 
as the Elektron Oehler Chemical Factory, Weiler-ter-Meer, Wulfing, 
Dahl & Co., Griesheim Chemical Works, Beyer & Kegel, Lembach & 
Schleicher, Dr. Remy & Co., Wilh. Brauns, and C. Jager, Dusseldorf. 
Moreover, the Swiss factories are quite serious competitors; there are 
a few in England and one in France, while the Russian factories need 
not be taken into account. The smaller factories are obliged to buy 
a large part of their basic substances from their large competitors. 
In the matter of inorganic chemicals, which the large manufacturers 
produce themselves, the small manufacturers are handicapped at least 
to the extent of the customs duty. 

The United States is the very place where the keenest competition 
prevails in aniline dyes, owing to the great consumption there of this 
product. It is a struggle of all against all, even the firms composing 
the combination contending among themselves, rather in the purchase 
of the material than in the sale of the product, to which is added the 
smaller German aniline-dye industry and the same industry in other 
countries, especially Switzerland. 

COAL-TAR COLORS. 

[Schedule A, No. 15.—Pamphlet 1, pp. 12, 22; pamphlet 2, p. 59; pamphlet 17, p. 1999.] 

The hearings given to the American interested parties have induced 
a prominent manufacturer of coal-tar colors to make the following 
remarks: 

On November 11, 1908, Mr. Schollkopf, of the firm of Schollkopf, 
Hartford & Hanna Company, of Buffalo, N. Y., the foremost repre¬ 
sentative of the American tar-color industry, requested that the duty 
on coal-tar dyestuffs, which had hitherto been 30 per cent ad valorem, 
be increased to 40 per cent, while on the other hand he wishes to have 
all coal-tar products—that is, the basic substances and intermediate 
products of the tar-color industry—left on the free list or put on the 
free list in the new tariff. On the other hand, the producers and 
elaborators of coke-oven products, among them the Barrett Manu¬ 
facturing Company, Frankford, Philadelphia, asked for a protective 
duty on coal tar and its distillates, benzoh toluol, napthalin, etc., and 
demand also, for the sake of building up the whole coal-tar and coal- 


6 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


tar-color industry in the United States, protective duties on the so- 
called intermediate products alongside those on coal-tar colors. Of 
the intermediate products which are not now manufactured in the 
United States they seem particularly to desire that the manufacture 
of aniline oil and aniline salt, which are imported free of duty in 
considerable quantities, be protected by an ad valorem duty of 20 
per cent, and they further desire the same duty on the likewise im¬ 
portant naphtols (alpha naphtol and beta naphtol) and naphtyla- 
mine, etc. A number of these intermediate products, especially the 
so-called aniline oil, aniline salt, naphtols, and naphtylamine, serve 
only in part in the further manufacture of tar colors and are for the 
most part employed directly for dyeing purposes, so that a duty on 
them would directly injure our importing interests. In connection 
with these requests there is also one to introduce a duty on alizarin, 
of which anthracene is the basic substance, whereby it is desired to 
strike section 469 of the Dingley tariff off the free list. 

We wish below to examine the statements of the aforementioned 
Mr. Schollkopf before the Committee on Ways and Means somewhat 
more in detail. 

This gentleman submitted a number of tables in order to prove that 
the costs of production for tar dyes in the United States are con¬ 
siderably higher than in Germany. Nevertheless any expert judge 
will immediately recognize that the tables can have no value as evi¬ 
dence, for they are based on a total production of 3,000,000 pounds 
without the individual products and dyes of which this total pro¬ 
duction is composed being mentioned. Such a summary procedure 
can not, of course, afford a correct idea, as the various dyes are pro¬ 
duced from entirely different raw materials and according to widely 
diverging methods of manufacture, besides showing great differences 
in price. A comparison would only be correct and of value if the 
costs of production of separate and specific dyes in the United States 
and in Germany could be compared together. 

Schedule B.—Earths, Earthenware, and Glassware. 

CHINA WARE. 

The-makes the following statement in reference to pamphlet 

28, page 4011: 

The statements on page 4011 et seq. are little in accordance with 
actual facts, for it is asserted among other things that women or girls 
are employed in Germany in the glazing of dishes and in the kiln 
work, whereas in reality female labor in this industry is almost im¬ 
possible, the employment of female labor in kilns being prohibited 
by police regulations in certain regions of Germany (for instance, in 
the district of Upper Franconia, where the greater part of the German 
china-ware factories are situated). Consequently the rates of wages 
given for female labor must be excluded in making the comparison. 
It is further seen from the statements made in the hearings that the 
German wages are everywhere given at the minimum rate at which 
the work in question is performed here and there, while for the 
American laborer certainly only the highest rates of wages are taken. 
Inasmuch, therefore, as the labor which is in reality performed by 



WAGES IN GERMANY. 


7 


men can naturally not be had for the wages assumed as being paid 
to female laborers, quite a large difference occurs in the relative wages 
given in the cases cited. This same rectification must also be made 
with respect to the production of cups and saucers, since turners who 
are trained workmen are frequently employed in this work in Ger¬ 
many, the employment of girls being by no means the rule. 

Table 12 and the following tables contain data based on reports 
from the chamber of commerce of Sonneberg. 

The data given by this chamber of commerce are based on condi¬ 
tions as they exist in this district, but these conditions do not serve as 
an index for the regions in which the real china-ware industry has its 
seat. 

In the Sonneberg district real table dishes are not manufactured, 
and the production of plates and cups is also inconsiderable. Entirely 
different articles are manufactured there, such as dolls, doll heads, 
trinkets, figures, etc. The manufacture of these articles is much 
easier, as cheaper raw materials are used, and these articles are pro¬ 
duced with a much lower fire than in the manufacture of real dishes, 
such as are principally exported to the United States. 

We, therefore, can not accept the data furnished by the Chamber of 
Commerce of Sonneberg as showing the real and general conditions, 
and we must rectify them as follows: 

In Table 13 (p. 4012 of the Hearings) we wish to take the princi¬ 
pal categories of laborers there mentioned and give the salaries 
actually paid as follows: 



Amount 
actually 
earned per 
week in 
Germany. 

Amount 

given. 

Differ¬ 

ence. 

Turners. 

$8.00 
6.00 

$6. 78 
3.47 

Per cent. 
20 
75 

Glazers . 

Burners. 

7.50 

3.47 

100 

Assorters... 

4.60 

3.04 

50 

Day laborers. 

4.50 

3.06 

a 70 



a More than given by the American informer. 


The great discrepancies in the wages of glazers, burners, and day 
laborers are due to the fact that the data relating to Germany, in 
Table 13, of the Tariff Hearings assumed a rate of wages paid to 
women, whereas the great majority of laborers employed in glazing 
and burning are men. 

For instance, in Bavaria the placing in and taking out of the kilns 
by women is prohibited by the factory inspector by way of police 
regulations. In the case of day laborers as low a rate as $3.06 is not 
paid anywhere, as women are not employed in this capacity any¬ 
where. 

The incorrectness of the difference between German and American 
wages, which is calculated at 218 per cent, may therefore be con¬ 
sidered as proven. 













8 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


That great errors are also made in stating the prices paid by the 
piece is shown by Table 14 (p. 4012 of the Hearings), for upon care¬ 
ful inquiry the wages by the piece are found to average as follows 
per dozen: 



Actually- 
paid in 
Germany. 

Price as 
given. 

Plates: 

S-ineh, 94* centimeters . 

$0.07 

$0.04 

7-in eh 99 centimeters .... 

.055 

.039 

6-inch, 19$ centimeters. 

.045 

.024 

5-inch, 17 centimeters.,..-. 

.03 

.017 

8-inch, deep, 24| centimeters. 

.077 

.04 

7-inch, deep, 22 centimeters. 

.06 

.03 

6-inch, deep, 19$-20 centimeters. 

.05 

.024 

Fruit saucers deep .. . 

.023 

.015 

Icecreams deep . . ... . 

.023 

.015 

Oatmeals, deep . . 

.027 

.02 

Cups and saucers: 

Handled, deep. . 

.06 

.031 

Thin, deep. 

.09 

.041 




Many factories, however, have to pay considerably higher wages. 
It must, finally, also be taken into consideration that the German 
manufacturers are compelled by law to contribute toward sick funds 
and old age, disability, and accident insurance. These contributions 
amount to 2 or 3 per cent of the wages, so that the figures given by us 
must be correspondingly increased. 

In Table 15 (p. 4013 of the hearings) raw materials are mentioned 
which are not all used in our industry, while in the case of some of 
them other kinds are used, than in the American factories. For in¬ 
stance, we do not use ball clay at all, while a more expensive quality 
of china clay, spar, and coal is required by us than can be obtained at 
the prices given by the American informant. 



Cost per 1,000 
kilograms in 
Germany. 

Cosfc as 
given. 

China clay, about. . 

$15.00-$16.50 
12.50 

$9.64 

7.73 

Flint, about. 

Feldspar, about.. 

9.00- 15.00 

7.73 

Sand. 

2.00- 3.00 

1.43 

Coal. 

3.25- 6.25 

3.69 



The cheap coal at $3.25 is a brown coal which is used very little, 
the burning being almost entirely done with anthracite coal, which 
costs the German manufacturers $6.25. 

We must characterize it as absolutely improper to strike an average 
of the prices of raw materials and compare it with the average in 
America. In the manufacture of china ware the expensive materials, 
such as china clay and feldspar, as well as coal, are used in much 
greater proportions than in the earthenware products of the United 
States. It would therefore seem just and proper to us if an attempt 
were made to determine the cost of the substance actually used, for 
a substance containing, for instance, 50 per cent of china clay is 
naturally dearer than a substance containing a smaller admixture of 
this clay. Moreover, the quality is an important factor in calculating 





























WAGES IN GERMANY. 


9 


the price. Another exceedingly important factor is the fact that, in 
order to obtain the high temperatures necessary in producing china 
ware, much larger quantities of coal must be used than for a product 
which requires only half the same temperature in burning. In view 
of these peculiar conditions of manufacture, it seems to us impossible 
to draw a comparison between the products of the two countries. 

The figures given in our communication as representing average 
wages, individual prices, and raw materials were determined on the 
basis of thorough inquiries made in a number of china-ware factories 
w hich are prominent among those engaged in exporting to the United 
States. These factories, in which the conditions with respect to labor 
and wages may serve as a standard for the other factories, are located 
partly in Bavaria, partly in Thuringia and Silesia. 

Our association has also sent sworn declarations regarding v 7 ages, 
individual prices, raw materials, etc., to America, and we append 
hereto a copy of these declarations. 

GLAZED EARTHENWARE (STEINGUT). 

The following has been reported to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Bonn in regard to pamphlet 28, page 3980 (cf. also pamphlet 13, 
p. 1438) : 

In justification of the increased tariff duties claimed to be necessary 
on fine ceramic products, the American manufacturers and their rep¬ 
resentatives first of all renew the assertion that undervaluation is con¬ 
stantly occurring in the importation of German ware into the United 
States. We must energetically protest against this charge as far as 
the earthenware industry is concerned. We are of opinion that, after 
all the inquiries made by the Americans, partly in secret and partly 
in the open; after the declarations given under oath and certified to 
by the chambers of commerce and the American consulates; after the 
exhibition of the books and correspondence of the manufacturers, there 
can hardly be any longer any doubt as to the market value of German 
earthemvare products. Apart from the fact that the American manu¬ 
facturers themselves have sent confidential agents to Germany, who 
employed questionable methods in gaining information regarding the 
manufacture, cost, and prices of these products, the agents of the 
United States Treasury have sought to inform themselves in numer¬ 
ous factories regarding all details worth knowing, and they will cer¬ 
tainly testify that they have been shown the greatest courtesy and 
frankness by the earthenware manufacturers of the German Empire. 
Furthermore, a special commission of the Treasury Department, in 
company wdth the aforementioned agents, held extensive conferences 
last year with the representatives of the more important German 
earthenware factories, this time also for the sole purpose of posting 
themselves regarding the actual market value of German earthenware 
products. In these conferences all questions which the commission 
found it necessary to ask were answered with the greatest frankness, 
the answers being substantiated by the exhibition of price lists, ac¬ 
counts, etc. It was proven on this occasion that there were certainly 
a large number of sound reasons which must make it appear explain¬ 
able if the export prices should be made specially lower also to the 
United States than the home prices, but that in view of the existing 
tariff laws of the United States this would not be done. After exam¬ 
ining the proofs exhibited, the commission admitted that the special 


10 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


additional duty of 19 per cent levied by the United States on German 
products owing to a suspicion of undervaluation was unjustified. 

Furthermore, the various chambers of commerce have repeatedly 
certified officially to the agreement between the export prices and the 
home-market value, and we can not too energetically protest against 
the discrediting of these certificates on the part of Mr. Burgess, the 
representative of the American manufacturers, who is well known in 
Germany for his somewhat unscrupulous methods of inquiry, he 
making the statment that the chambers of commerce accept the dec¬ 
larations of the manufacturers as true without further inquiry and 
certify to their correctness. (Hearings, pp. 89-88.) Whenever we 
have given such certificates we have always most conscientiously en¬ 
deavored to verify the declarations made, and we are certain that all 
other chambers of commerce have fulfilled their duty in like manner. 
If Mr. Burgess feels compelled to fight with such weapons as this, 
the other grounds for his demands must certainly not appear tenable 
even to himself. 

When it is contended that our own statistics afford evidence of 
undervaluation for the reason that the estimated total of our exports 
to the United States is greater than shown by the statistics of the 
United States prepared on the basis of the bills for the imported 
goods, we must answer by saying that such estimates must always 
be very doubtful in the case of products which vary so greatly in 
price according to their quality. There is, for instance, a great dif¬ 
ference whether 100 kilograms of the most finely decorated ware is 
sent or whether only the most ordinary staple article is referred to. 
Moreover, 100 kilograms of a single article from one firm may very 
easily be less in value than 100 kilograms of exactly the same article 
of another firm. Then again, 100 kilograms of hollow ware will 
have a much different value than 100 kilograms of so-called “ Plat- 
terie.” The quality of the ware, its composition, its character, its 
make-up, etc., play too important a role in the determination of the 
value for estimated values to lay claim even to approximate accuracy. 

Besides the fact that the American manufacturers still unjustly 
assert that undervaluation exists in spite of all their scrutiny into 
the most intimate business and manufacturing conditions, they also 
maintain that the higher cost of manufacture in general and the ma¬ 
terially higher wages in particular should justify a most extraor¬ 
dinary increase in the customs duties. Let us first of all examine 
into the higher cost of manufacture. 

In the first place, the Americans claim that the capital invested in 
a factory in the United States is necessarily much greater than in a 
factory of similar extent in England and still more so on the Conti¬ 
nent. On the one hand, it is said that the land is dearer, and then 
that the cost of raw materials and wages is considerably higher; that 
a much larger warehouse must be maintained by the American fac¬ 
tories, and finally that they have many outstanding debts, while 
the foreign manufacturer receives his payment promptly from the 
importing houses. 

In connection with the cost of land we wish to remark that proba¬ 
bly only in the larger manufacturing centers the land may be dearer 
than in Germany, although even here these prices have risen con¬ 
siderably in large cities. It would be difficult to draw comparisons 
in this regard. However, we are also aware of the fact that in the 


WAGES IN GEKMANY. 


11 


United States cities (especially smaller ones) grant great favors to 
newly established factories with respect to the acquisition of lands, 
among other things, free building space, exemption from taxes for a 
number of years, and sometimes free water and natural gas, where 
this is present in abundance; and it even happens that cash is given 
as a bonus under the condition, for instance, that it shall become the 
property of the factory owner if he continues to operate the factory 
for a number of years. Many factories are consequently established 
for the direct purpose of robbing the people of money. Then again, 
building regulations and restrictions in our sense of the word do not 
exist to hinder the American manufacturer in the erection of his new 
factory, thus rendering it more expensive, as is the case with us. 
Hygienic regulations, which materially increase the cost of building 
here, are likewise absent, and smoke regulations do not disturb the 
manufacturer in his enterprise. To the further question of the cost 
of the raw materials we shall come back again. That the foreign 
manufacturer—that is, the German manufacturer—does not have to 
keep a very large stock on hand, at least not for a very long time, 
from which to fill the orders from the American import houses, is 
correct; this is one of the very reasons which would make a lower 
price for these goods seem justified, as they are usually ordered for 
America in large lots. However, there is no German earthenware 
factory which sells all or even a majority of its products to America, 
they being all dependent to a considerable extent on the sales at home 
or in other export markets, where the conditions of the business are 
different; and they are therefore all obliged to keep large stocks on 
hand, the same as the American factories. A glance at the balances 
of accounts of the German earthenware factories, which exist in the 
form of joint-stock companies, will show how high these stocks of 
goods must be valued. According to the last financial statements of 
three large earthenware factories, these stocks of goods amounted to 
70, 41, and 40 per cent of the entire sales of goods. It is the same 
with regard to the question of outstanding debts. It is true that 
prompt payments are received from the American importers in con¬ 
sideration of due discounts; however, in the business transacted at 
home there are perhaps larger items of outstanding debts than in 
America, where prompter payment is the general rule. This is also 
amply proven by the balance sheets of our joint-stock companies. In 
the case of the aforementioned three factories the outstanding debts 
amounted to 36, 16, and 11 per cent of the entire business transacted. 

Furthermore, the statement that the cost of materials is higher in 
the United States than in Germany is incorrect when made in so 
general a manner. Regarding this cost the Americans give the fol¬ 
lowing data (p. 4002) : 



England. 

America. 

China clay, English . 

$7.30 

$11.30 

Ball clay: 

American. 

6.57 

8.70 

English..-.. 

9.45 

Flint dry... . 

4.42 

8.28 

Feldspar . 

13.00 

11.76 


10.20 

14.00 

Pflpprpr marl ......._................_..........__ 

.90 

2.16 

Wad clay. 

.96 

1.62 


3.20 

3.70 


2.75 

3.50 





















12 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


We have also made inquiries regarding the more important of these 
articles in Germany, the information gathered being from factories 
situated on navigable waterways, and procuring their foreign mate¬ 
rials on vessels sailing directly from England or France, and also 
from factories situated inland. In the case of these latter the costs 
of foreign materials must naturally be higher, owing to the higher 
freight rates. On the basis of these inquiries we have the following 
figures to compare: 



Factories 
situated 
on a water¬ 
way. 

Factories 

situated 

inland. 

1. China clay, English. 

88.81 
6.43 

$10.24 

2. Ball clay, English... 

8.00 

3. Flint dry. 

9.52 

10.95 

4. Feldspar. 

(?) 

10.50 

(?) 

11.90 

5. Stone. 

6. Sagger’s marl. 

3.45 

3.45 

7. Wad clay. 

1.80 

1.80 

8. Sand. 

6.00 

6.00 

9. Coal. 

4.45 

4.45 



This list shows, in the first place, that our home materials indicated 
under numbers 6, T, and 8 are at any rate much higher than in 
America, and that also among the foreign materials flint costs all 
our factories more than it does the American factories. The only 
materials which are somewhat cheaper to our factories are those 
enumerated under numbers 1, 2, and 5, but still the difference is not 
so great, especially to the inland factories, but that it would be en¬ 
tirely offset by the higher prices for the other materials. The data 
given for American coal seem too high to us. We have other data 
furnished us by disinterested parties who are well acquainted with 
conditions in the United States, and we wish to compare them with 
the figures given by Mr. Burgess. Inferior boiler coal costs $1.05 
a ton in the Ohio Valley and better coal from $2.50 to $8 at most. 
Moreover, natural gas is frequently used in American pottery works, 
the cost being only $0.10 per 1,000 cubic feet. This gas is also clean 
and convenient to use and enables a saving to be made in labor. To 
be sure, it is admitted on page 4,018 of the Tariff Hearings that the 
cost of coal is higher here than in America, but we think that the 
price of $3.50 as given for America is too high, while the rate of $3.69 
as given for our factories is certainly too low, as the data ascertained 
by us abundantly show. We believe we are not wrong in stating 
that no more than half the amount is ever spent in a pottery works 
of the United States that is spent in our factories. 

As regards the statements concerning wages by the piece for certain 
important articles, as well as the weekly wages paid, we wish at once 
to state in general that these statements must always appear exceed¬ 
ingly doubtful when the particular circumstances under which the 
wages are paid are not exactly specified. For the amount of wages 
depends essentially on the internal organization of a factory and also 
on whether the workmen produce the various articles alone or with 
the aid of assistants, how many such assistants are furnished, 
whether the assistants are paid by the head workman or receive 
special wages and are correspondingly trained; whether the sub- 

















WAGES IN GERMANY. 


13 


stance to be used in manufacturing the product is brought to 
the workmen at their place of work free of charge; also whether 
the completed article is sent for there and who has to attend to 
bringing the necessary molds, and whether deductions are made 
from the laborer’s wages for apprentices, consumption of material, 
cleaning of the workshop, lighting, etc. All these things naturally 
influence the piece wages paid for the articles produced, as well as 
the weekly wages, which also depend on the degree of skill of the 
individual workman. Then again, the pay by the piece naturally 
varies for one and the same article according to its size and shape. 
In the comparative table given on page 4009 of the Tariff Hearings, 
showing the wages paid by the piece for certain of the more important 
staple articles in Germany, Holland, and America, no special remarks 
are made regarding the size and shape of the articles, it being only 
added in regard to plates that those meant are 7-inch plates. It is 
true that in these tables of piece wages in England and America the 
sizes are given in the case of certain articles at least, but the shapes are 
not mentioned, and sometimes the statements differ, as, for instance, 
in the case of cuspidors, teapots, casseroles, and soup tureens. It is 
therefore hard to tell whether identical articles are compared to¬ 
gether here, and we even presume that for the very reason that no 
specific explanation is made, the word “ dozen ” is not always used 
to designate 12 pieces, but that the word is used, as frequently in 
England, to designate a certain space taken up in the kiln. 

Even if we overlook all these serious objections to so superficial a 
comparison of wages, and assume that the articles compared are iden¬ 
tical as well as that the organization of all the factories is the same, 
nevertheless it is shown that the rates of wages given especially for Ger¬ 
many are incorrect. We have obtained the wages paid on the chief 
staple articles by 15 earthenware manufacturers from all the various 
regions of Germany, and can assume with certainty that the data fur¬ 
nished us are correct, especially as the inquiry was originally made 
for an entirely different purpose. Among the factories are some 
which are modern and equipped with the latest improvements, while 
others are older; then there are some of them which produce the best 
quality of ware and others which manufacture only ordinary or in¬ 
ferior qualities; finally there are some which export and some which 
do not. Of course the wages paid by the piece in these factories 
vary, this being a result of the unequal cost of living in the various 
parts of Germany; nevertheless the differences are not so great as 
one is inclined to suppose, and this very fact may serve as a guaranty 
that the data furnished are in accordance with facts. 

On the basis of these data we find the average wages per dozen of 
the following articles to be as follows: 


Plates, 23 centimeters (7 inches)-$0. 0254 

Cups_ . 0239 

Saucers_i- . 0165 

Bowls with straight legs- . 0299 

Bowls with curved legs- . 0588 

Teapots- • 441 

Cuspidors- . 767 

Soup tureens, round- . 543 

Soup tureens, oval- . 714 


In these data the sizes and shapes of the various articles taken were 
those which are principally exported to the United States. One 











14 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


dollar was taken to be equal to 4.20 marks. The result differs mate¬ 
rially from the figures given by the Americans, which appear as 
follows on page 4009 of the Tariff Hearings: 



Germany 

America. 

Plates, 23-centimeter (7-inch). 

$0.0148 
.0075 
.0075 
.0075 
.0091 
.24 
.12 

$00.04 
.0325 
.0275 
.035 
.05 
.68 
.38 
2.07 


Saucers... 

BoavIs with st.raiirhi legs. . 

"Bowls with curved legs. .__._. 

Teapots... 

Cuspidors.'. 

Soup tureens ._. 




From this we can only draw the conclusion that the inquiries made 
by the Americans resulted in procuring erroneous data and that 
articles w T ere compared together which are not capable of comparison, 
or else that the wages do not represent the compensation of the laborer 
alone, but also of his assistants. That our figures can lay much 
greater claim to correctness is also shown by making a comparison 
with the wages given for England. These are as follows, according 
to the Tariff Hearings: 



As given. 

In 

Germany. 

Plates, 23-centimeter. 

$0.026 

$0.0254 

Cups. 

.0147 

.0239 

Saucers. 

.0168 

.0165 

Bowls with straight legs. 

.021 

.0299 

Bowls with curved legs. 

.021 

.0588 

Teapots. . 

.598 

.441 

Cuspidors... 

.758 

.767 

Soup tureens. 

1.67 

J .543 

\ .714 



The large difference between the piece wages for cups in England 
and Germany can only be explained by the fact that two different 
shapes are compared together. Probably the figure given for England 
refers to the cup known in Germany as the “ Stuttgart ” or “ breakfast 
cup,” which is also listed by some of our factories and on which 
the wages by the piece are variously given at $0.0171 and $0.0186 and 
higher. The fact that the same wages are indicated for bowls with 
curved legs as those with straight legs in England must be due to 
an error, for it is easily understood that the former kind would require 
higher wages than the latter, because the curved leg must be specially 
turned. We can not understand the high rates given for soup tureens, 
as given for both England and America. We consider the American 
rate of $2.07—that is, $0.17 or 71.4 pfennigs apiece in wages alone to 
be impossible. We also have great doubts regarding the American 
wages given for plates, and are inclined to suppose that the turner 
does not receive this rate alone but that he must pay his assistant out 
of it. However, even if we should waive this doubt the piece wages 
paid in America are by no means as much higher as represented by the 
Americans, for the rate is 57.5 per cent higher in the case of plates, 
36 per cent for cups, 66.67 per cent for saucers, 17 per cent for 
straight-legged bowls, and 54.2 per cent for teapots, while in the case 




























WAGES IN GERMANY. 


15 


of bowls with curved legs and cuspidors the German rates are even 
higher than the American. 

We reach the result that the American piece wages are about 50 
to 60 per cent higher than ours on certain principal staple articles of 
earthenware, but by no means on all, and that our rates are about 
equal to the English rates. 

As regards the statement of Mr. Burgess, in his report of Decem¬ 
ber 1, 1908 (Tariff Hearings, p. 4009), to the effect that cups and 
saucers are made by youthful laborers in Germany, this is not cor¬ 
rect, at least not as a general rule. Cups are now chiefly made by 
men, very seldom by women, and saucers are made in part by appren¬ 
tices; however, this is the case chiefly in factories which produce 
inferior ware, and as such ware is practically never exported to the 
United States, this question is entirely eliminated from the argu¬ 
ment. It is the same with the other assertion that the work of glaz¬ 
ing is exclusively performed by youthful laborers or women in 
Germany. As far as we know men only are employed in the German 
factories on this work; to be sure they have female assistants, and 
perhaps in isolated cases also youthful assistants. However, similar 
assistants are also employed in glazing in England and the United 
States, as is shown on page 4006 of the report, where the wages paid 
to dippers’ help (women) and dippers’ help (boys) are given. The 
statement that female laborers are chiefly employed in Germany and 
Austria in filling the kilns, while this work is done in America en¬ 
tirely by men is also devoid of foundation. As regards the placing 
of small-sized dishes into the kilns, women are still employed in 
German factories because they have smaller and more skillful hands 
for this work, but in the case of larger articles men only are em¬ 
ployed. It is entirely incorrect that two men are sufficient to carry 
the boxes in and place them in the kilns when 14 women are en¬ 
gaged in filling the boxes. We are reliably informed that at least 
five laborers are necessary in order to perform this work when 14 
persons, whether male or female, are employed in filling the boxes. 
Inasmuch, therefore, as the wages given by Mr. Burgess for Ger¬ 
many are without doubt incorrect in the case of the more important 
staple articles of the earthenware industry, and as the other state¬ 
ments are also contrary to actual facts, the calculation of Mr. Burgess 
regarding the advantages enjoyed by the German earthenware in¬ 
dustry as compared with the American in wages alone falls flat. 

If we now turn to the alleged weekly wages in the various cate¬ 
gories of laborers, we must again emphatically assert that these rates 
can likewise not be compared without careful inquiry. As was inti¬ 
mated above, these rates are influenced by the degree of skill of the 
workmen, the length of hours, and the circumstance whether or not 
they are employed continuously throughout the week, and what arti¬ 
cles they have to produce; likewise the technical arrangements of the 
factory in which they are employed, and the internal organization 
and extent of the latter, the transportation facilities within the fac¬ 
tory, and the situation of the latter are all determining factors. 
Owing to the variability of all these conditions these weekly wages 
must vary even more than the rates paid by the piece. We also find 
this fact'to be substantiated in the statements that have been fur¬ 
nished to us. For instance, the average weekly wages of the earthen¬ 
ware turners and molders fluctuate between 24 and 42 marks, so that 


16 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


almost twice as much is earned in some factories as in others. Of 
course there is also a great difference in the amount of work per¬ 
formed. The factories have informed us, in the case of the more im¬ 
portant articles, how many articles are turned out as a maximum by 
a good turner, and how many are turned out on an average per day, 
and the data vary as follows: 


Plates. 

Cups. 

Saucers. 

Bowls with 
straight 
legs. 

Good day’s work. 

Average day’s work.. 

. 1 400-1,200 

.j 350- 800 

350-1,000 
300- 800 

500-1,000 
450- 800 

350-900 

300-700 


This amply explains the differences in wages observed. In indi¬ 
vidual cases higher wages are, of course, earned than those given, and 
molders and turners in particular receive higher wages for larger 
articles as well as so-called sanitary earthenware, the production of 
which requires special skill. This is probably the reason why the 
German hard stoneware industry is not in a position to compete with 
American industries in such things as sanitary stoneware (closets, 
washstands, urinals, etc.), the American ware being considerably 
cheaper than ours, and being even imported into Germany. 

In judging a comparison of average iveekly wages all these circum¬ 
stances should be taken into account, and in order to do this more 
detailed information would be necessary regarding the factors which 
influence the weekly wages if one wished to make a comparison. This 
was not done, however, and therefore these data can likewise not be 
considered as valid evidence. Nevertheless we will also place our data 
in this case beside the American data. The average weekly wages 
paid in 1908 were as follows: 



According to American 
data (pp. 4003,4006). 

According 
to our in¬ 
quiries in 
Germany. 

England. 

America. 

Engine lathe turners. 

$8.42 
5. 94 
5.82 
2.60 
9.96 
2.66 
7.70 
9.12 
' 6.76 

3.50 
7.20 

$22.12 
14.13 
18.75 
7.17 
22.66 
6.00 
17.53 
20.16 
19.46 

$7.57 
8.09 

6.56 

2.57 
7.23 
2.96 
6.36 
8.22 
5.26 
3.22 
7.85 

Hollow casters. 

Printers. . 

Transferrers (girls)..... 

Glazers (male). 

Glazers (female). 

Sagger makers. 

Mold makers (Formgiesser). 

Ordinary laborers (male). 

Ordinary laborers (female).. 

Kiln men (Brenner)... 

14.40 



This table again shows a noteworthy similarity and even identi ty. 
between the wages earned in England and Germany, and this may 
serve as an additional proof that our statements are in accordance 
with actual facts. However, as against the rates given for America, 
there are considerable discrepancies, the American rates being given 
as twice as high and even more than ours. It would be important 
to ascertain whether the rates given for America are really averages 
and, if so, how these averages were found. If this was done in the 
































WAGES IN GERMANY. 


17 


same way as the average weekly wages of the laborers in a factory, 
in a report of Mr. Burgess, were determined (p. 4003), we can by no 
means admit these average wages as being correct. Mr. Burgess, in 
order to reach the aforesaid averages, merely adds together the av¬ 
erage earnings given in the various categories of laborers and divides 
the result by the number of categories. He thus leaves entirely out 
of account how many laborers there are in each category. That such 
an average must be entirely incorrect goes without saying. 

In the first place we doubt whether the average of the weekly 
earnings was ascertained in a regular manner. We are specially 
strengthened in this doubt by the fact that even in the case of those 
categories, such as turners, throwers (former), molders, etc., which, 
in the comparison of the piece wages, showed a difference of only 
50 to 60 per cent at the highest (and then only in a part of the staple 
articles under consideration), the differences in the weekly wages are 
so great. If we can not explain these differences by the incorrect 
method of ascertaining the average, then the only way to explain 
such large differences will be to suppose that the wages are not 
earned by the laborers alone but include the pay of their assistants, 
especially apprentices who are assigned to them, or else that the 
manual skill of the American laborers is much greater than ours 
and consequently that a larger number of articles are completed, or 
finally that the hours of labor are longer, whereby the same result 
would be obtained. 

It also appears strange to us that, for instance, the weekly earnings 
for the turners are considerably higher than those of the pressers and 
also of the kiln men. Hollow casters, kiln men, molders. and engine- 
lathe turners receive almost equal pay in our factories, but the hollow 
casters and casters in no case receive less than the turners, the same 
being applicable to the kiln men. The same is the case in England, 
with the exception of the hollow casters, while considerable differ¬ 
ences are found in America. 

We are therefore justified in entertaining doubts regarding these 
data on American weekly wages and must energetically protest 
against comparisons of these wages being made in the manner in 
which it was done by Mr. Burgess, and then basing a demand for a 
higher protective tariff on these comparisons. 

Moreover, we must call special attention to the fact that in the 
report of the American manufacturers no account is taken of the 
very considerable obligations which are imposed on German manu¬ 
facturers by the social-political laws. In America, for instance, the 
employer has no obligations to provide for sick, accident, old age, 
and disability insurance in behalf of his employees, such a thing as 
a contribution on the part of the employer and to some extent on the 
part of the whole nation for the purpose of providing for laborers 
being entirely absent. The American laborer provides for himself 
by insuring in private life insurance companies or secret orders, asso¬ 
ciations, and funds, to which he must pay a considerable part of his 
wages. This amount would have to be deducted from the wages in 
America, or at least as much thereof as would correspond to the part 
paid by the manufacturers in Germany. 

We have before us an interesting calculation of selling prices of 
goods which was made by one of our factories, and which, to be sure, 
4731—S. Doc. 68, 61-1, pt 2-2 


18 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


is not correct as regards all other factories, but would probably show 
more or less considerable differences in certain items, especially in the 
wages, but which will nevertheless afford an indication in judging the 
question as to how high a customs duty in the United States may be 
considered as justified, while sufficing to enable the American fac¬ 
tories to sustain competition. The calculation is as follows: 

Per cent. 


1. Salaries of officers_ 7- 2 

2. Real wages_ 38.4 

3. Coal_ 10.0 

4. Raw materials for earthenware and glazing-1 f- 4. 6 

5. Other materials for saggers, plaster, painting, etc.— I 23.5 j- 5.6 

6. Packing and mountings_(per cent i- 5. 5 

7. Price lists, traveling expenses, office expenses-J l- 7. 8 

8. Taxes and laborer insurance_ 2. 0 

9. Depreciation_ 6. 5 

10. Interest on capital_ 5. 9 

11. Profit_ 6. 5 


Selling price_100. 00 

We have the following calculation from another well-known earth¬ 
enware factory: 

Per cent. 

1. Salaries of officers___ 6.13 

2. Wages_ 38. 46 

3. Coal_ 10.70 

4. Raw materials, etc_ 29. 60 

5. Taxes and insurance_ 1. 93 

6. Depreciation_ 6. 20 

7. Interest_ 3.48 

8. Profit_ 3.50 


Selling price_100. 00 


The agreement between the two calculations can not help being 
recognized. If we now ask to what extent the American manufac¬ 
turer labors under more unfavorable conditions, we shall see that in 
the first place the salaries of officers in the pottery works are lower 
than in Germany. This is clearly shown in a statement given on page 
4006 of the Tariff Hearings. There the salary for a bookkeeper is 
given as about $936 (3,900 marks) ; for an office clerk, $520 (about 
2,100 marks) ; for younger office help, $208 (900 marks) ; for engi¬ 
neers in the factory, $936 (3,900 marks) ; for managers, $1,300 (5,400 
marks); all these being salaries which average considerably higher 
in our country. We admit that they pay more for wages, but we are 
convinced that on an average they do not pay over one-half more 
than our wages. They do not by any means pay twice as much in 
wages as we do, but we will assume that their wages are twice as 
high as ours without admitting that this is actually the case. In the 
matter of coal the American factories, as shown above, realize a sav¬ 
ing of 5 per cent, and our expenditures for raw materials and other 
substances are at least equal to those of the Americans, according to 
our statements above; items 6 and 7 will hardly show any differences, 
item 8 can hardly be regarded as a factor in America since there are 
no expenditures for laborer insurance, so that these expenditures 
would have to be added to our rates of wages. Items 9, 10, and 11 
may be considered as equal in the two countries. The calculation for 
the American factories would then be as follows: 100.004-38.4—5 0 
—2.0=131.4. 




























WAGES IN' GERMANY. 


19 


From this should be deducted the freight to America, the packing 
duty, and the cost of authentication so that a duty of 25 per cent at 
the highest would be justified. 

In Volume III of the Transactions of the American Ceramic 
Society we find a similar calculation (except that the interest on the 
capital invested, depreciation, and the profit are eliminated), accord¬ 
ing to which the expenses of the manufacturer of china ware are 
divided as follows: 

Per cent. 


Cost of labor_ 70.77 

Cost of materials_ 21. 31 

Management and miscellaneous_ 7.92 


100. 00 

Let us also leave out items 9, 10, and 11 in our first example cited 
above, and by grouping items 1, 7, and 8 together under management, 
etc., and 3, 4, 5, and 6 as cost of materials, we shall have the following 
distribution: 


Per cent. 

Cost of labor_ 47.3 

Cost of materials_;_ 31. 7 

Management_ 21.0 


100.0 

Supposing now that the cost of materials, etc., is the same in Ger¬ 
many as in America, the expenses of management, etc., would also be 
as high as the American rate (in fact they are higher in Germany 
for both items), and let us take the above rate of wages of 47.3 per 
cent and then the selling price in Germany would be 47.3+21.31+ 
7.92=76.53 as against 100 in America; the selling price would thus 
be again about 31 per cent higher in America than in Germany, and 
we come to the same result as before, this being all the more remark¬ 
able for the reason that this result is based on data from an American 
source, although to be sure the source is a different one than that 
from which Mr. Burgess obtained his data. 


However, in another table Mr. Burgess himself gives the following 
data regarding the total cost of production in an earthenware factory 
(p. 4008) : 



Amount. 

Percent. 

Labor 

858,912.28 

42,996.00 

9,430.00 

1,500.00 

1,450.00 

975.00 

52.00 

37.96 

| 10.03 

Material and fuel...... 




Oas and water.... 

Total . 

113,263.38 

100.00 



This table does not differ specially from ours, which also tends to 
prove the incorrectness of the statements made regarding costs. 

We can not help emphatically stating here again that the inquiries 
made in a most questionable "manner by Mr. Burgess during his 


























20 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


visits are contrary to good morals and can lay no claim to credibility. 
As far as that is concerned, this view is also held by competent au¬ 
thorities in the United States, for in the proceedings against the firm 
of Haviland & Co., of Limoges, the American general appraiser, Mr. 
Waite, admitted himself in his decision that the value of the state¬ 
ments of Burgess and associates must be regarded as doubtful. To 
use his own words, “(It) is in my judgment somewhat discredited, 
owing to the roundabout and secret method pursued in obtaining it.” 

Berlin, January 19 , 1909. 

sjc H* ❖ & $ sfc 

We hereby declare under oath that the following figures represent 
the true average weekly wages paid in the German china-ware facto¬ 
ries located in different parts of the country: 

Marks. 


Turners_31. 75 

Burners_30. 25 

Day laborei’Su_19. 02 

Assorters_18. 65 


These wages are increased by at least 2 per cent for government 
payments rendered necessary by the social laws. 


We hereby declare under oath that the following figures represent 
the average wages paid to turners working on the various articles 
paid for per hundred in the German china-ware factories located in 
various parts of the country: 

Thick hotel dishes: 

Plates— 

15 centimeters 
17 centimeters 
19 centimeters 
21 centimeters 

23 centimeters 

24 centimeters 

Cups, coffee_ 

Cups, tea_ 

These wages are increased by at least 2 per cent for government 
payments necessitated by the social laws. 


Marks, 
per 100__ 1. 02 

_do_1.13 

—do_1.30 

—do— 1.81 

—do_1.96 

—do_2.24 

_do_2. 86 

—do_2.82 


We hereby declare under oath that the following figures represent 
the average weekly work performed in German china-ware factories 
situated m various parts of the country: 


Dishes: 

13, 14, and 15 centimeters_4, 585 

16 centimeters_3,165 

Plates: 

15 centimeters_4, 800 

17 centimeters__ 4 , 430 

19 centimeters___ 4 , 365 

21 centimeters_ 3 , 950 

23 centimeters_ 2,700 






























WAGES IN GERMANY. 


21 


We hereby declare under oath that the following figures represent 
the average wages paid to turners working on the various articles 
paid for by the hundred in German cliinaware factories located in 
various parts of the country: 


Smooth ware. 

Dishes: Marks. 

13, 14, and 15 centimeters_per 100__ 0. 77 

16 centimeters_do_•_ . 90 

Plates: 

15 centimeters_do_ . 88 

17 centimeters_do_1.01 

19 centimeters_do_1. 23 

21 centimeters_do_1.60 

23 centimeters_do_1. 91 

24 centimeters_do_2. 29 

Cups, coffee, medium thickness_do_1. 95 

Cups, tea, medium thickness_do_1.88 

Cups, coffee, thin_do_2. 96 

Cups, tea___do_2. 86 * 


Flowered ware (Feston) costs somewhat more in some cases. 
These wages are increased by at least 2 per cent owing to pay¬ 
ments to the Government rendered necessary by the social laws. 


We hereby declare under oath that the following prices of raw 

materials are the true cost prices to the chinaware factories in Ger¬ 

many, according to their geographical situation: 

Marks per 
1,000 kilograms. 

China clay_ 60.10-67. 50 

Quartz___ 8. 00-49. 70 

Feldspar_ 35. 00-61. 95 

Sagger marl_____,— 8. 00-13. 60 

gaud_• _ S. 00—11. 50 

Coal_ 13. 00-25. 20 


The great difference of price in quartz is explained by the fact that 
certain factories employ quartz sand which they find in pits of their 
own near their factories, while other factories use only Norwegian 
quartz in lumps, w 7 hich even at the place where found is considerably 
dearer and which is rendered still higher in price by the high freight 
charges and the cost of grinding. 

The difference in prices of feldspar and coal, etc., is also explainable 
by the different source and quality of the material and the geo¬ 
graphical situation of the factories. 


GLASS BOTTLES. 


[Pamphlet 15, p. 1723 ; pamphlet 48, pp. 72-73.] 

The correctness of the statements regarding the cost of production 
of glass bottles, which is said to be $3.55 or $3~10 in the United States 
and only $1.70 in Germany, is disputed by the German interested par¬ 
ties. From one quarter the statement is made that the cost of pro¬ 
ducing one gross of glass bottles in Germany is 8.80 marks at the 
present time. From another quarter the following statement is made 

























22 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


in refutation of the statements made regarding the cost of production 
in the United States: 

The Owens Company, of Toledo, United States of America, which 
is the owner of the patents on the Owens bottle-blowing machines, 
has given an exact account of the cost of production of bottles in a 
prospectus in which it advertises the sale of the patents. In this 
prospectus a comparison is made between the bottles made by hand 
and those produced by machinery. It declares that 1 gross of hand¬ 
made bottles costs $2.72 and 1 gross of machine-made bottles $1.16. 
As the Owens Company, or the closely allied Toledo Glass Company, 
is a producer of bottles itself, it is naturally greatly in its interest to 
represent the cost of hand-made bottles as being very high, so that the 
price of $2.72 is no doubt the highest that can be given, generally 
speaking. This fact will serve as well as anything to show the 
amount of reliance to be placed on the Americans’ statement that the 
cost amounts to $3.10 per gross. Moreover, the production of bottles 
by machinery has come very rapidly into vogue in America, and bot¬ 
tles manufactured in this manner cost only $1.16 per gross, or $1 
less than the presents duty amounts to. 


—-. The cost of producing glass bottles in Germany is 

$2.09, and not $1.70, per gross, as claimed before the committee. The 
Owens Bottle Company, of Toledo, interested in the manufacture 
of machine-made bottles, states that the cost of hand-made bottles is 
$2.72 per gross, while the cost of machine-made bottles is $1.16, while 
the figures presented before the committee were $3.10 to $3.55. 


-reports as follows regarding pamphlet 48, page 7213, 

in addition to his previous statements: 

The Headley Glass Company, Danville, Ill., states among other 
things that the earnings of an American glass blower amount to $6 
to $10 a day, while German glass blowers earn $0.60 to $1 per day. 
These statements are, in our opinion, incorrect. The figures given as 
representing the earnings of American bottle makers are in direct 
contradiction to the statements of the Americans themselves concern¬ 
ing the cost of bottles. According to the declarations of Mr. Agard 
(document No. 15 of the Tariff Hearings, p. 1724), the cost of pint 
and quart bottles amounts on an average to $1.83 a gross, including 
labor, salaries, and blowing. 

If we remember that a laborer does not make more than 2 or 3 
gross of these bottles per day on an average, and furthertnore that, 
as we have proven before, the statements regarding the cost of pro¬ 
duction are also estimated too high, it will be shown clearly without 
further examination how greatly exaggerated are the statements of 
the Headley Glass Company regarding the wages earned by a glass 
blower in America. On the other hand, the data regarding the earn¬ 
ings of German bottle makers are too low, as we are informed by the 
bottle works which we represent. Then again it must be considered, 
in comparing costs of production, what great expenditures the Ger- 






WAGES IN GERMANY. 


23 


man bottle manufacturers have to make for relief institutions, such 
as sick, accident, disability, and old age insurance, laborers’ dwell- 
mgs, etc., these being burdens which do not have to be borne by 
American manufacturers. 

GAS RETORTS AND SETTINGS. 

The following has been reported to the chamber of commerce of 
Stettin in relation to pamphlets 28, 30, and 40, pages 3922, 4285, and 
5923 : 

The grounds alleged by the American factories for their petition 
to increase the duties on retorts and fancy settings are not in accord¬ 
ance with the actual facts. Moreover, the importation of these 
articles into the United States has been so slight that absolutely no 
injury has resulted therefrom to the United States, especially in view 
of the fact that the only retorts and settings imported from Ger¬ 
many are such as were not and could not be manufactured in the 
United States. The majority of the fireproof materials required 
by the factories in America are furnished by themselves and only 
small parts come from abroad, so that a change in the customs duties 
does not seem necessary; on the contrary, a reduction ought to be 
made, in order to afford the consumers in the United States an oppor¬ 
tunity to avail themselves of the advantages of the improved appli¬ 
ances of foreign countries. 

The statements made by the manufacturers regarding the cost of 
production are not correct. The German exporting firms obtain 
part of their raw materials from abroad and part from remote re¬ 
gions in Germany and have to pay much higher prices for the raw 
materials than the American factories, which, as they themselves 
state, have their oAvn clay deposits. It is absolutely impossible to 
employ women in making the articles which are exported to America; 
on the contrary, the workmen who produce these articles earn (in 
our factories) 5 to 6 marks a day. 

Moreover, the expenses for coal here in Germany are much heavier 
than in America, and many of the American factories have the 
great advantage of water communications, in consequence of which 
they have very cheap freight rates from the place of manufacture to 
the place to which the goods are shipped. 

The statement of the American manufacturers that the clay is taken 
here directly from the surface of the ground and that the clay diggers 
receive only 30 cents a day is entirely unfounded. The contrary is 
the case. In the very extensive clay district near Halle on the Saale 
the clay is mined by means of subterranean galleries. To be sure the 
Silesian deposits are worked open, but unusually large quantities of 
earth have to be removed, and it is practically impossible to find labor¬ 
ers in Germany at present for 50 cents a day. 

Furthermore, it is absolutely incorrect to say that the goods are 
transported to America as ballast. In the first place, the quantities 
exported are much too small to be used as ballast for either steamers 
or sailing vessels, and in the second place no steamhip company thinks 
to-day of carrying our goods at about 50 per cent cheaper rates, as 
the American* manufacturers state. An inquiry of the steamship 
companies in question would reveal the fact that the freight on fire¬ 
proof bricks and retorts is not only not cheaper than on other articles, 


24 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


but that on the contrary they are considered as “ bulky goods.” In 
the case of retorts there is also the extraordinarily great risk of break¬ 
age which must be borne by the shipper—that is,‘the supplier—so that 
the importers are in a much more unfavorable position than the 
American manufacturers. 

The duty of $3 per retort is perfectly commensurate with existing 
conditions, and, in view of the insignificance of the article, there is no 
reason for making any change in this rate; on the other hand, there 
are good grounds for fixing the maximum import duty on retort set¬ 
tings over 10 pounds in weight (so-called “ mold bricks ”) at 25 per 
cent ad valorem. Even then there will still be so few imported that the 
American manufacturers will experience no disadvantage therefrom; 
on the contrary, by affording American consumers an opportunity to 
become acquainted with the new arrangements and improved appa¬ 
ratus the American manufacturers will derive the advantage of being 
able to utilize these improvements themselves, as the consumers will 
at all events buy these imported apparatus in America later on, when 
they are no longer protected by patents. > 

It is true and it is not denied that the American articles are equal 
to those of foreign countries in quality, but, as said before, the ques¬ 
tion is one chiefly regarding new devices, as far as the imports are 
concerned, and these imports are so insignificant that there is no excuse 
for an increase in duty. 


OPTICAL INDUSTRY. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Weimar reports as follows regard¬ 
ing pamphlet. 15, page 1735, and pamphlet 47, page 6872: 

-criticises the statements regarding the wages paid 

in the optical industry. It writes: 

“We wish to state expressly that conditions with us can not serve as 
a criterion for the whole optical industry of Germany. Just as is the 
case in America, the rate of wages with us also varies according to 
whether the goods are of ordinary quality or made with mathematical 
accuracy, and also according to whether they are manufactured in 
the country, in small towns, or in large cities. We ourselves manu¬ 
facture only instruments of precision (microscopes, microphoto¬ 
graphic apparatus, prismatic telescopes, photographic cameras and 
objectives, and optical measuring instruments). Any first-class opti¬ 
cian will be able to give information as to the quality of our goods. 
We dare say that as a general rule our German colleagues engaged 
in the manufacture of these articles pay the same wages as ourselves. 
German workmen have the advantage of government old age and dis¬ 
ability insurance. In our case there is the additional advantage of 
the old-age (pension) insurance maintained by the firm and the in¬ 
demnity granted to employees discharged through no fault of their 
own. According to the very carefully prepared statistics which we 
publish from time to time, the average wages of all our employees 
{trained and untrained) who are at. least 24 years old and have 
worked at least three years for us, amount in round numbers to 40 
marks, or $10 a week. Of course we have persons who earn only 
from $7 to $8 a week, but also others who receive an average of $15 
a week and more. Owing to the frequent transfers of laborers from 
one work,shop to another, we know that these wages are the same as 
those paid by our neighboring German competitors. 



WAGES IN GERMANY. 


25 


“We guarantee the correctness of these figures, though they show 
that the statements of several American manufacturers, to the effect 
that two or three times higher wages are paid in America in this 
industry than in Germany, are based on insufficient information.” 


The --reports as follows regarding pamphlet 17, 

pages 2049-2051, and pamphlet 22, pages 2959-2960: 

1. It is untrue that undervaluations occur in the invoices regarding 
enamel ware exported to America, for the purpose of paying less cus¬ 
toms duties than prescribed by the American tariff law. 

2. It is untrue that good ware is declared as second-class ware with 
a less invoice value in order to secure advantages in the customs pay¬ 
ments. 

The-—, to which the vast majority of all enamel ware 

exported belongs, is ready to furnish any proof desired to the effect 
that the invoicing of ware sold to America is strictly done to its full 
value according to the laws in force, and that the only ware invoiced 
as second class is that which is really low-class ware; also that the 
shipments of this low-grade ware constitute but a small per cent of 
the ware exported to America. 

3. It is untrue that the importations of German enamel ware have 
restricted the development of the United States enameled-ware indus¬ 
try. On the contrary, the enameled goods industry in the United 
States has been steadily developing from year to year, has been 
highly capitalized and always been successful, and produces and 
sells quantities of goods to which the imported goods bear but an in- 
finitestimally small relation. 

4. The building of an American importer mentioned in the Tariff 
Hearings relates to a small enamel ware factory near Dresden of very 
slight importance. In the interests of the German enamel-ware man¬ 
ufacturers themselves care is taken that shipments from this little 
factory to North America are not invoiced and declared at lower 
prices than the market values which govern in accordance with the 
law. 

5. It is untrue that the wages paid in the United States are so much 
higher than those paid by the German enamel-ware manufacturers. 
The majority of the German enamel-ware manufacturers pay about 
the same wages for expert workmen in this industry as are paid by 
the American manufacturers to American workmen. 

6. The ware designated in pamphlet 22, page * 2950, as “ Elite 
enamel ware ” and other brands do not come from Germany, but 
from Austria-Hungary. 

7. It is untrue that the correct market value of enamel ware manu¬ 
factured in Germany can not be ascertained because 90 per cent 
of the enamel ware produced in Germany is exported. The exports 
of the German enamel-ware industry are only about 40 per cent of 
the German enamel-ware productions in general. The remaining 60 
per cent remains in Germany. 

As many million dollars are involved in the sales of this ware, the 
correct market value of that remaining in Germany is easily ascer¬ 
tained. It can be proven without difficulty that the ware exported to 
the United States is not exported, invoiced, and declared before the 






26 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


American customs authorities at any cheaper rate than the actual 
German market value. 

8. It is untrue that the American customs law is evaded by having 
part of the goods exported to America in an unfinished state. 

Schedule C.— Metals, etc. 
gold leaf. 

[Pamphlet 17, p. 2051.] 

The following communication has been received by the Chamber 
of Commerce of Nuremberg from a manufacturer of gold leaf: 

I have read the declarations of Mr. Hastings before the Committee 
on Ways and Means with great interest. In my opinion they are 
partial throughout and far from being to the point and in accordance 
with facts. First of all, I must say that the protective duty of $1.75 
per package as provided in the Dingley tariff has entirely fulfilled its 
purpose as a protective duty. It has also operated in another way 
which was probably not intended, namely, it has kept the American 
gold-leaf industry in the position occupied by the same industry in 
Germany about sixty years ago at the time of the “ guilds.” Mean¬ 
time considerable changes have been made in the process of manufac¬ 
ture, which have resulted in material increases in the ivages of the 
workmen. These changes consist in the distribution of work, the 
sharing of the workmen in the saving of raw gold by thinner beating, 
etc. The earning of a workman here in Germany, working forty- 
eight hours a week, is from 50 to 80 marks per week, and of youthful 
assistants from 25 to 30 marks per week. These are the correct 
figures. To be sure, a man and a girl make more than 9 packs (of 
500 sheets each) per week in consequence of the distribution of labor 
and other practical arrangements. However, all these advantages 
in the German method of manufacture as compared with the Ameri¬ 
can would not have sufficed to offset the effect of the American duty 
of $1.75. The imports from Germany are only a result of the cir¬ 
cumstance that the American gold-leaf industry was not able to meet 
the increased demand for gold leaf in America during the good busi¬ 
ness years from 1904 to 1907. It was only for this reason that they 
turned to Germany, and the latter country filled the lacking supply. 
The strikes on the part of the gold beaters were responsible for the 
large amount of imports into America, which were 20,000 packages 
in 1902, 35,849 in 1903, and $167,000 worth in 1907. At the end of 
1902 and the beginning of 1903 the American gold beaters had a 
strike lasting twelve weeks, and in 1906 to the beginning of 1907 there 
was another strike of about ten weeks. This explains the increased 
imports of these years, and Mr. Hastings might have told the chair¬ 
man this if he had wished, or if he had been asked. 

bronze powder. 

[Pamphlet 17, p. 2035.] 

The following statement has been made to the Chamber of Com¬ 
merce of Nuremberg: 

The request of the American Bronze Powder Manufacturing Com¬ 
pany that the duty on bronze powder be raised from 12 cents to 15 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


27 


cents is wholly unwarranted. The request for an increase of duty is 
based by the aforementioned firm on alleged lower wages in Germany. 
We show herein that the difference in the wages results in so insignifi¬ 
cant a difference in the price of the finished product as to take away 
all justification for an increase of duty. 

A bronze worker stamps in one w r eek 150 to 200 kilos and receives 
in wages an average of 20 marks per week, which makes 10 to 13 
pfennig per kilo, or 4J to G pfennig per English pound; therefore, 
on an average, pfennig per pound. A polisher finishes per week 
5,000 to 6,000 kilos at an average of 20 marks wages per week. This 
gives, per kilo, 3J to 4 pfennig, or about 1} pfennig per pound Eng¬ 
lish. Therefore the average wages for the output of bronze colors 
in Germany amount to about 7 pfennig per English pound. Admit¬ 
ting that wages in the United States are twice as high as in Germany, 
they would amount to 14 pfennig per English pound, which gives an 
excess of less than 2 cents per pound. American manufacturers have, 
therefore, in their present tariff an advantage of 10 cents per pound 
over the German manufacturer and the American Bronze Powder 
Manufacturing Company wants to have this advantage raised to 13 
cents. 

There are at present in the United States four or five firms that 
produce (bronze colors), and by careful estimate employ at the most 
100 persons altogether. In the interest of these 100 persons the price 
of bronze colors is now to be raised for the American consumer. 

The high duty finally might yet be justified if the American manu¬ 
facturers sold their products for as much less as they save there in 
the (cost of) production. As we figured it out above, this saving 
amounts to about 10 cents per English pound. The consumers, how¬ 
ever, derive no benefit whatever therefrom, since the American manu¬ 
facturers sell almost precisely at the same price as their German com¬ 
petitors, or at a reduction only just sufficient to render competition 
by German manufacturers impossible. The tariff protection, there¬ 
fore, does not benefit the American consumer, but flows into the pock¬ 
ets of some four or five manufacturers. 

PIG IRON. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Dusseldorf reports as follows on 
the price of German foundry pig iron: 

The price of $13.36 per ton of German foundry pig iron, free 
Rheinhafen, as given in pamphlet 17, page 1917, is much too high. 
Rhenish-Westfalian foundry pig iron No. 1, which is the product 
here referred to, cost at the time of these hearings (November, 1908) 
about 65.50 marks, and on an average during 1907 about 76 marks. 
The price as given by the Americans is therefore 12 marks too low in 
one case and 22.50 marks too low in the other, so that the conclusions 
drawn therefrom are also wrong. 

STATISTICS REGARDING LABORERS AND WAGES IN THE PFORZHEIM GOLD AND 
SILVER WARE INDUSTRY. 

As was done for 1896 and 1900, the directors of section 3 of the 
South German Association of workers in precious and ordinary 


28 


WAGES IN' GERMANY. 


metals (headquarters at Pforzheim) has also had prepared for 1903 
a set of statistics regarding laborers and wages in the Pforzheim 
gold and silver ware industry, the source from which the statistics 
were compiled being the pay rolls. On these rolls every laborer, 
even though he was employed only one day, is mentioned, together 
with the amount of his wages, so that these data must be regarded as 
the most reliable basis for the preparation of wage statistics. 

The statistics, which were prepared with the most painstaking ac- 
- curacy and doubly verified, cover the entire Pforzheim precious or 
ordinary metal industry, including both ornamental articles and 
larger ones (articles of use, table utensils, etc.). They include not 
only the factories in which the articles are manufactured ready for 
use, but also those in which the metals employed are prepared, as, 
for instance, artificial jewel factories, and also those which produce 
half-manufactured articles (jewel settings, “ chatons ” and “ gal¬ 
leries”), and also those which only perform single operations neces¬ 
sary in the manufacture, such as pressing works, gilding works, etc., 
and, finally, also the “separating shops” (Scheideanstalten). The 
laborers in all the factories were classified under ten heads on special 
sheets. A more detailed classification would have rendered it difficult 
to gain a general view of the situation. Therefore persons employed 
in some other manner were included under the head showing the same 
rates of wages, and these persons are not very numerous. Accord¬ 
ingly the following classifications were made: Heading 1, jewelers, 
chain makers, pressers, silversmiths, artificial jewel makers, wire 
drawers, safety hook makers (Karabinermacher), tula-work decora¬ 
tors, nurlers; heading 2, jewel setters only; heading 3, engravers, 
designers, enamelers, Guilloche designers, chiselers; heading 4, me¬ 
chanical workmen only; heading 5, male assistants, errand boys, 
smelters, stokers, carters (the latter in “ separating shops ”) ; heading 
6, polishers only; heading 7, chain makers, bead pressers, enamelers, 
burnishers, jewel setters, gilders, etc. (all female) ; heading 8, female 
assistants, errand girls, seamstresses, and laundresses in “ Scheidean¬ 
stalten; ” heading 9, male apprentices of all the various trades; head¬ 
ing 10, female apprentices of all the various trades. 

As was stated before, every worker is included on the pay rolls, even 
though he was employed but a short time. Inasmuch as it is very 
common for workmen to exchange places in our factories, it fre¬ 
quently occurs that the same workman appears on several rolls, so that 
the whole number of workers included in the rolls would be too great. 
The association takes as a basis the number of “ full-time workmen,” 
which is obtained by adding together the workdays of all workmen 
in each industry and dividing the sum by 300. However, even this 
number may not represent the actual facts, for it is hardly likely that 
an average of more than two hundred and seventy working days in a 
year can be calculated on per person, if all delays caused by transfers, 
occasional interruptions of work, days of sickness, etc., are considered. 
If we proceed on this basis, we shall have the following results: 



1896. 

1900. 

1908. 

The number of workdays in all industries. 

3,588,594 
13,291 

4,374,312 
16,201 

4,681,535 
17,339 

The number divided by 270, number of laborers employed. 













WAGES IN GERMANY. 


29 


It must be emphatically stated in this connection that the foremen, 
here called u Kabinettmeister,” are not included among the workmen. 
At the end of this publication a compilation of all industrial workers 
m the Pforzheim gold and silver ware industry will be o-iven. 

Numhet of laborers contained in the pay rolls in the various categories, and 

their average daily earnings. 

A. MALE WORKERS. 



1896. 

1900. 

1903. 

Number. 

Daily 

earnings. 

Number. 

Daily 

earnings. 

Number. 

Daily 

earnings. 

1. Jewelers, chain makers, and pressers. 

2. Jewel setters and jewelers. 

3. Engravers. 

4. Mechanical workers. 

5. Assistants. 

7,574 

940 

650 

109 

679 

Marks. 
3.24 
4.15 
4.09 
4.21 
2. 67 

9,071 
1,079 
738 
203 
832 

Marks. 
3.90 
4.66 
5.07 
4.71 
2.78 

9.909 
1,509 
763 
264 
989 

Marks. 
4.04 
5.02 
5.42 
4.87 
3.18 


PcrcentJigc of increase of pay as against 1896 : (1) Jewelers, chain 
J4.7 ; (2) jewel setters and jewelers. 20.9; (3) engravers, 32.5; (4) 
15.7 ; (5) assistants, 19.1. 


makers, and pressers. 
mechanical workers. 


B. FEMALE WORKERS. 



1896. 

1900. 

1903. 

Number. 

Daily 

earnings. 

Number. 

Daily 

earnings. 

Number. 

Daily 

earnings. 

6. Polishers. 

7. Chain makers (female). 

8. Female assistants. 

3,541 

1,015 

153 

Marks. 

1.95 

1.98 

1.69 

3,869 
2,343 
319 

Marks. 

2.38 
2.30 
1.83 

3,867 
2,852 
557 

Marks. 

2.48 

2.49 
2.0b 


Percentage of increase of pay as against 1896: (6) Polishers (female), 27.2; (7) chain 
makers (female), 25.7 ; (8) female assistants, 23.1. 


C. APPRENTICES. 



* 1896. 

1900. 

1903. 

Number. 

Daily 

earnings. 

Number. 

Daily 

earnings. 

Number. 

Daily 

earnings. 

9. Apprentices (male). 

10. Apprentice girls. 

2,458 

1,194 

Marks. 

0.93 
.77 

2,667 

1,361 

•* 

Marks. 

1.08 

.95 

2,747 

1,410 

Marks. 

1.13 

.98 


Percentage of increase of pay as against 1896: (9) Apprentices, 21.5; (10) apprentice 
girls, 27.3. 


































































30 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Of the adult male workers, gold and silver workers, engravers, 
jewel setters, pressers, mechanical workers, and assistant laborers 
earned the following daily wages: 


f 

Number of workmen. 

1896. 

1900. 

1903. 

Up to 2.70 marks. 

1,317 
2,484 
2,767 
2,143 
693 
548 

1,128 

1,552 

1,428 

2,902 

2,201 

2,712 

292 

478 

739 

4,181 

4.051 

2,192 

1,492 

From 2.71 to 3.20 marks . 

From 8.21 to 3 50 marks... 

From 3.51 to 4 marks. 

From 4.01 to 4.50 marks... 

From 4.51 to 5 marks. 

5 01 marks and above.. 





This shows that during the years from 1896 to 1903 an exceedingly 
large number of workmen were transferred to categories receiving 
considerably higher Avages. 

The number gwen as working in the two lowest categories con¬ 
sists mostly of youthful workers who have finished their apprentice¬ 
ship but a short time before. 

Number of factories and the average number of full-time workers employed 

therein. 


[Regarding the term “ full-time worker,” see above.] 


1 

1896. 

1900. 

1903. 

Factories with— 

Number. 

Number. 

Number. 

1 to 10 workmen. 

196 

166 

160 

11 to 20 workmen. 

134 

115 

121 

21 to 30 workmen. 

67 

76 

67 

31 to 40 workmen. 

36 

44 

54 

41 to 50 workmen. 

22 

26 

30 

51 to 60 workmen. 

9 

15 

12 

61 to 70 workmen. 

9 

6 

9 

71 to 80 workmen. 

7 

12 

11 

81 to 90 workmen. . 

4 

6 

12 

91 to 100 workmen. 

2 

5 

4 

101 to 120 workmen. 

9 

8 

8 

121 to 150 workmen. 

4 

1 

4 

151 to 180 workmen. 

3 

4 

1 

181 to 210 workmen. 

2 

4 

3 

221 to 240 workmen. 

0 

2 

2 

241 to 300 workmen. 

1 

2 

2 

301 to 340 workmen. 

0 

2 

2 

341 to 365 workmen. 

0 

0 

1 

352 workmen. 

0 

o 

1 

Total. 

505 

494 

504 



In 1900 there was a diminution of 11 as against 1896, while in 
1903 the number shown for 1896 was again approximately reached 
(1 factory less). 

The number of full-time workers was 11,962 in 1896, 14,581 in 1900, 
and 15,605 in 1903. There were thus an average of 23 to 24 employed 
per factory in 1896, 29 to 30 in 1900, and 30 to 31 in 1903. 

As above stated, the number of laborers (Kabinettmeister ex¬ 
cepted) employed in the Pforzheim gold and silverware industry in 
1903 was 17,339. It might now be of great interest to learn the total 
number of persons employed in the Pforzheim gold and silverware 

















































WAGES IN GERMANY. 


31 


industry and the enterprises connected therewith. We will first give 
a synoptical table of the number of independent auxiliary enterprises 
present here in 1903 (according to the Pforzheim directory), as well 
as of the persons employed therein (according to the estimate of the 
section foreman), whereupon Ave will give the total numbers of 
employees. 

Auxiliary enterprises connected with the Pforzheim gold and silverware 

industry in 1903. 



Number of 
factories. 

Persons 

employed. 

Brush factories. 

19 

50 

10 

“Brisur” factories. 

3 

Cardboard work and labels . 

10 

50 

Cementers. 

7 

10 

Enamelers. 

53 

150 

1 

“Dusting” establishments (Entstaubungsanstalten). 

1 

Instrument cases and mountings.7.1. 

4 

20 

Instrument-case pressing works. 

2 

5 

Instrument-case and goods-box factories. 

21 

300 

Gold painters. 

3 

10 

Engravers. 

82 

160 

Guilloche designers. 

3 

10 

Jewelers. 

6 

180 

Cement factories. 

4 

10 

Modelers. 

5 

5 

Inlavers with black enamel (niello). 

3 

5 

Stove factories.!... 

4 

40 

Pressing works. 

21 

40 

Stone drillers. 

3 

3 

Stone polishers. 

8 

20 

Gilders. ;. 

20 

80 

Designers.. 

14 

14 

Machine shops. . 

51 

500 

“Draw-iron” factories. 

5 

10 

Money-box factories. 

3 

15 



Total. 

S95 

1,698 



Compilation of the persons employed in the Pforzheim gold and silverware in¬ 
dustry and in the business enterprises connected therewith. 

[According to estimate of the section foreman.] 


Persons employed in auxiliary enterprises_ 1, 698 

Number of manufacturers__1_ 750 

Number of foremen (Kabinettmeister)_ 300 

Persons employed at home_ 1, 500 

Office employees in the jewelry industry_ 2, 000 

Wholesale establishments and their employees_ 250 

Stone dealers and their employees__ 200 

Banks and their employees_ 70 


6,768 

Added to this, industrial laborers in 1903 according to the above sta¬ 
tistics_17, 339 


Total_24,107 


RAZORS. 

The following is reported to the Chamber of Commerce of Solin- 
gen: 

On page 4318 of pamphlet 30 of the Tariff Hearings there is a 
comparative table of the weekly earnings of German and American 
laborers employed in the razor industry. The wages paid in Ger¬ 
many are given much too low, so that we deem it necessary to correct 
them. 


















































32 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


In Appendix I the actual average weekly earnings of the various 
categories of laborers are given according to reliable calculations of 
several firms specially engaged in exporting to the United States. 
The incorrect American data are given beside them. 

Average weekly earhings of German razor workers. 


Data given by the Cham¬ 
ber of Commerce at So- 
lingen. 

Categories of laborers. 

Incorrect 
data given in 
the Tariff 
Hearings. 

Amount. 

United States 
i equivalent. 

Marks. 

Forgers..... 35-45 

Hardeners... 42-48 

Dry grinders.. 

$8.33—$10.71 
10.00- 11.43 

$4.30-$7.00 
4.30- 6.00 
4.30- 5.70 
4.30- 9.00 
4.30- 5.70 
4.30- 5.00 
2.50- 6.00 

Coucavers... 65-75 

Polishers. . 

15.47- 17.85 

Handle makers.. 40-44 

Honers... 40-45 

9.52- i6.47 
9.52- 10.71 


GOLD LEAF. 

In answer to pamphlet 30, page 4227, the Chamber of Commerce of 
Dresden reproduces the following statement of a manufacturer: 

The comparison between American and German conditions of pro- . 
duction are absolutely erroneous, especially with regard to wages. 
There are no girls working for 3 marks a week in the Dresden gold¬ 
beating industry. At Dresden a female laborer earns at least 12 
marks, on an average 15 to 16 marks, and especially good workers 
18 marks a week. A beater of pure gold receives an average of 30 
to 35 marks a iveek. Gold beaters earning 25 marks a week are very 
poor workmen. The statements regarding the part which the wages 
represent in the cost of production, page 4230, are very misleading, 
because the amount of work performed by a laborer in a week is 
greatly underestimated. 

The statement on page 4231 that German gold leaf is beaten thinner 
than American and can therefore be offered cheaper is incorrect. The 
United States is the very place where gold leaf is beaten very thin, 
for which reason very thin gold leaf is required when purchases are 
made from Germany. Likewise incorrect is the remark on page 4232 
et seq. to the effect that German gold beaters send larger-sized sheets 
to the United States in order to save duty, the American duty being 
calculated only according to packages. The report itself states that 
the value of the imported goods has considerably decreased, but at 
the same time also that the principal part of the cost of production 
is in the raw material itself. Inasmuch- as considerably larger quan¬ 
tities of raw material are required when the sizes of sheets are 
considerably larger, the prices must not have fallen, but risen. 

WATCHES. 

I Pamphlet 30, p. 3301.] 

The following report is made to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Kottweil: 

The rural customs of cheap domestic industry which the Ameri¬ 
cans seem still to have in view have long since become a thing of the 



















WAGES IN GERMANY. 


33 


past and only the best equipped watch factories, with large capital, 
can enter into the struggle at all. Moreover, the times when, accord- 
mg to the Americans, laborers worked eleven hours a dav are long 
past, and if we take into account the noon recess, the stoppage at 

5 o clock on Saturday, and the cessation of work in the evening 
owing to the absence of many workmen as early as ten minutes before 

6 o’clock, there remains barely nine and one-half hours at best. More¬ 
over, the Americans are more or less exempt from the social burdens 
and other taxes and contributions which we have to bear. 

I do not deny that there may be a slight difference in wages, but 
if it is taken into consideration that humane conditions still prevail 
here; that is, that in view of the personal relations of the manufac¬ 
turer with the individual, we employ our workmen even in bad 
times, and especially that we employ the aged laborers, even though 
they be unable to perform the same amount of work, in such a man¬ 
ner that they may continue to receive their usual wages, the difference 
is probably made up by these circumstances. 

JEWELRY. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Pforzheim regarding pamphlet 21, 
page 2777: 

It is admitted that the American wages are higher than the Ger¬ 
man, but the correctness of the statement that German wages are 
only half as high is disputed. According to an inquiry now being 
made, and the result of which will be published during the course 
of this year, regarding the Pforzheim precious-metal industry in 
1906 (the corresponding data for previous years are contained in the 
printed inclosure), the following average daily wages are paid to 
male employees, according to their qualifications and their particular 
trade: Jewelers, 4.48 marks; bracelet makers, 4.79 marks; mounters, 
5.57 marks; makers of mountings, 5.30 marks; modelers and makers 
of models, 5.45 marks; master cabinet workers (Kabinettmeister). 
7.82 marks; makers of jewelry boxes, 5.24 marks; solderers, 5.73 
marks; designers, 8.81 marks; technicians, 8.72 marks; steel engrav¬ 
ers, 6.15 marks; setters of jewels, 5.38 marks; silversmiths, 4.47 
marks; makers of artificial stones (Doublemacher), 4.98 marks; 
enamel painters, 7.05 marks, etc. 

Female employees received, for instance, the following average 
daily wages: Polishers, 2.76 marks; chain makers, 2.74 marks; oxy- 
dizers, 2.93 marks; gilders, 3.09 marks; silverers, 2.95 marks; jewel 
setters, 4.39 marks; brushers, 2.43 marks; enamelers, 2.82 marks. 

Attention must be particularly called to the fact that these data indi¬ 
cate the average wages for all persons belonging to one trade. The 
various degrees of talent, skill, and qualifications of different indi¬ 
viduals are therefore not shown in these wages, which are greatly 
exceeded by those paid for specially proficient workers. 

All professions, learned, unlearned, and mechanical, being reckoned 
together, the average daily wages paid in the Pforzheim precious- 
metal industry in 1906 for adult male workers was 4.75 marks and for 
female workers 2.70 marks. 

Furthermore, the correctness of the statement is disputed that one- 
third of the cost of production of a piece of jewelry made of gold is 
in the value of the material and two-thirds in the wages paid. The 
4731—S. Doc. 68, 61-1, pt 2-3 


34 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


proportion is quite different, according to the article and the value of 
the material used. 

In conclusion, it is remarked that the American jewelry industry 
copies German models and not vice versa. 

SILVERWARE. 

[Pamphlet 30, p. 4323; pamphlet 32, p. 4728.] 

The Chamber of Commerce of Heidenheim has received the follow¬ 
ing report: 

When the Americans assert that they pay their workmen in the 
silverware industry 4 to 6 times as high wages as are paid in Germany, 
this is simpty not true. 

The following wages are paid in Germany: 


Founders_*_-30 

Pressers_8-00 

Laborers_0. 80 

Chiselers---0. 50 

Solderers._6.80 

Punchers__6.00 

Steel engravers_8.00 

Engravers_7.00 

Hammer workers--8. 60 

Polishers_4. 50 


Average_ 6. 70 


The following has been reported to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Heilbronn: 

The remark contained in pamphlet 30 regarding the ratio of Amer¬ 
ican to German wages is not at all in accordance with facts. 

If a comparison is made between American wages and those paid in 
Germany for the same work, it will be found that in many cases the 
German wages are equal to the American and that only in a few cases 
the American wages are from 14 to 2 times as high as the German, 
but not 3.4 or 6 times as high. 

For instance, we pay a turner from 11 to 11.50 marks and the 
Americans 11 marks a day; a plate beater receives 9 marks here and 
9 marks in America per day; an engraver 8 marks here and 12 in 
America; and a chiseler 6.25 marks here and 13 marks in America. 

It must further be taken into consideration that about half the 
amount on which duty is levied is in the metal itself, and as silver is 
much cheaper in America than in Germany, there is so much less 
reason for basing the protective duty also on the value of silver. 

SNAP FASTENERS (PRESS BUTTONS). 

The Chamber of Commerce of Stolberg, Rhineland, has received 
the following report relating to pamphlet 30, page 4324: 

Although the comparison made by the American firm, United 
States Fastener Company, of Boston, regarding snap fasteners may 
be recognized at first glance as partial and designed only for the lay¬ 
man who is unable to draw the correct conclusions from it, we will 
nevertheless examine the matter more closely, and will state first that 
the press button in question is a kind which is turned out ready to 
use by machinery, so that the only real hand labor to be taken into 
consideration is the silvering, lacquering, and packing. 















WAGES IN GERMANY. 


35 


For the sake of greater clearness in the comparison we will first 
consider the amount of wages paid to the mechanical force turning 
out a yearly production of 2,000,000 gross, as shown in the following 
table: 

Production per day, and wages. 




United States. 

Germany. 


Hours. 

Wages. 

per 

month. 

Wages 
per day. 

Wages 

per 

month. 

Wages 
per day. 

Master workman. 

10 

8106 

83.53 

Marks. 

200 

Marks. 

6.66 

Overseer. 

10 

69 

2.30 

150 

5.00 

Master workwoman. 

10 

58 

1.83 

75 

2.50 


Pay per hour. 



Hours. 

United States. 

Germany. 

Rate. 

Total. 

Rate. 

Total. 





Marks. 

Murks. 

Turner. 

4 

80.50 

82.00 

0.60 

2.40 

Electrician. 

2 

.30 

.60 

.50 

1.00 

Die sinker. 

70 

.20 

14.00 

.60 

42.00 

Tool maker. 

10 

.35 

3.50 

.70 

7.00 

Blancher. 

25 

.275 

6.87 

.40 

10.00 

Lacquerer. 

36 

.275 ! 

9.90 

.55 

19.80 

Packer. 

30 

.275 

8. 25 

.37 

11.10 

Ordinary laborer (female). 

70 

.10 

7.00 

.70 

49.00 

Ordinary laborer (male). 

70 

.20 

14.00 

.25 

17.50 

Woman fastening buttons on card. 

70 

.10 

7.00 

.20 

14.00 

Total per dav. 


1 . 

a 80. 78 


b 187. 96 








“At 4.16=336.04 marks, or for three hundred working days 100,812 marks, or for 1 
gross of press buttons 0.05 mark, in the United States. 

h Or for three hundred working days 56,388 marks, or for 1 gross of press buttons 0.028 
mark, in Germany. 

If to these figures the usual rate of 100 per cent be added for man¬ 
agement expenses, the result will be 0.10 mark in the United States 
and 0.056 mark in Germany. 

In making a comparison of the cost of the clerical force we will 
assume that for a yearly production of 2,000,000 gross the clerical 
force given in the American statement is necessary, although we 
consider it greatly exaggerated. 

The expenditures in salaries per year will accordingly be as follows: 



United States. 

Germany. 

Per 

month. 

Per year. 

Per 

month. 

Per year. 

Bookkeeper . 

852 

43 

34 

43 

78 

43 

150 

8624 

516 

408 

516 

936 

516 

1,800 

Marks. 

200 

120 

150 

125 

130 

125 

500 

Marks. 

2,400 

1,440 

1,800 

1,500 

1,560 

1,500 

6,000 

QAcnnd hcnlflfPPTiPr .. 


Do . 

ftl'iimAPr ... 

Stenographer and typewriter. 

Snrkprin fpndpnt 



a 5,316 


16,200 



_ 


“At 4.16=marks, 22,114, or, per gross of press buttons, 0.11 marks United States, 108 
marks Germany. 








































































36 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


As the two comparisons show, the difference in the expenses, even 
taking the highest American figures as against the actual German 
figures, is as follows: 

te ’ Mark. 


1. For the' mechanical force only_0. 022 

2. For the clerical force_0. 03 

3. Average of the two together._0. 052 


The goods are already protected by the high rate of duty of 45 
per cent in behalf of the American producer, and therefore the 
exorbitant demand of the single American firm to increase the pro¬ 
hibitive duty to 75 per cent is astounding. 

If, as the American firm states, the selling price of one gross of 
finished buttons is 15 cents or 62J pfennigs, the German manufac¬ 
turer, if he had no duty to pay, would earn fully 20 pfennigs more 
than the American out of this selling price of 62J pfennigs. 

However, the American is already protected by the old rate of 45 
per cent, and can consequent^ pocket a profit of 10 pfennigs more per 
gross than the foreigner. If the absolutely exorbitant prohibitive 
duty of 75 per cent were adopted, his profit would be at least 20 
pfennigs per gross greater. Moreover, the selling price of 15 cents, 
mentioned by the American firm, refers only to a very cheap button, 
the upper and lower parts of which consist only of a single bit of 
sheet brass. It does not refer to that better quality of press buttons 
which, besides the sheet metal parts, contain an ingeniously arranged 
bronze spring and are not produced by American manufacturers, but 
are imported by German and Austrian manufacturers. 

We will moreover call attention to the fact that the aforementioned 
quality of press buttons are sold at $0.40 in the American wholesale 
market so that, at this high selling price, the Americans do not have 
to compete with the foreign manufacturers. The imports of the 
ordinary cheaper button are insignificant. 

Schedule F. —Sugar, 
sugar. 

* * * reports, in addition to his former statements in connection 
with pamphlet 5, page 338, that at present about the following wages 
are paid: 

Pfennigs 
per hour. 

1. He;ul laborers, etc., 3.50 to 5 marks per day; so that this is correct. 

2. Unloaders of beets, etc., into the washing tank, below 30 pfennigs per 

hour as against 5 cents (21 pfennigs). Data are lacking regarding' 
the persons unloading beets from wagons and cars into sheds, etc. 


This work is not done by contract, and the men earn_30-45 

3. Beet washers, about_ 30 

4. Diffusion battery_28-35 

5. Assistant laborers_26-30 

6. Saturation__26-30 

7. Filter presses_ 26-28 

8. Evaporating station_28-32 

9. Vacuum (cooker)_30-40 

10. Stoker- 30_35 

11. Smiths (artisans)_35-45 


The laborers employed in the beet fields (Zuckerbodenarbeiter) ,who 
work mostly by contract at 30 to 45 pfennigs per hour, are entirely 
omitted. 















WAGES IN GERMANY. 


37 


BEET SUGAR. 


[Pamphlets 5, 19, 31, 42.] 

~ makes the following remarks regarding the utter¬ 

ances of the American interested parties concerning conditions in the 
sugar industry: 

Pamphlet 5: On page 254 Mr. Colcock makes the following state¬ 
ment : & 

Reciprocity has somehow become a fad with the tariff revisionists. In order 
to create a way for it, we hear of suggestions to create maximum and minimum 
rates. 

I can not find that sugar is regarded by the continental nations of Europe as 
an article which adapts itself to such a purpose. Under the Brussels Conven¬ 
tion an extra duty was established on sugar and the thus increased duty ex¬ 
cludes sugar entirely (from importation). 

Why should this article then be made the basis of reciprocity treaties in the 
United States? 

This statement is false. Exactly the opposite has come about 
through the Brussels Convention. The countries signing the conven¬ 
tion, as far as they export sugar, have, through this convention, lost 
their until then existing tariff autonomy with respect to sugar, and 
have had to reduce the extra duties to such an extent that an extra 
duty can hardly any longer be said to exist. The reason why the im¬ 
ports of sugar into these countries has not materially increased in 
spite of this is that their markets are already so completely filled by 
their own production that there is no longer any room for foreign 
sugar. 

On page 294 Mr. Hathaway compares the cost of production of 
North American beet sugar, which he places at 4 cents per American 
pound, with an average calculation for German beet sugar, which 
he bases on the f. o. b. Hamburg prices taken from Willet & Grey. 
In doing this he compiles the prices from 1900 to 1907,-in order to 
arrive at an average price of about 2 cents per pound of 88-degree 
German beet sugar. 

In this calculation the mistake is made of placing the export prices 
of the years 1900 to 1903 on an equal basis with those of the previous 
years. As a matter of fact, however, the producer still received the 
export premium and the advantage of the “ cartel ” in the years 1900 
to 1903. If it is desired to obtain the average price in this manner, 
only the years 1904 to 1908 can be used as a basis. 

We should then attain the following result, adding by way of sup¬ 
plement for 1908 the price calculated by Willet & Grey. 

According to this the table of prices would be about as follows: 


Beet sugar 88 degrees f. o. b. Hamburg, per hundred pounds. 


1904. 

1905. 
1900. 
1907. 
1908- 


$2.14 
2.55 

1. 87 

2. 05 
2 2 -) 


According to this the average price would not be 2 cents per pound, 
but 2.17 cents. 








38 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Likewise, the average price of granulated sugar f. o. b. Hamburg is 
not 2.38^ cents, but 2.58 cents, as shown by the following calculation: 


[Per 100 pounds.] 

1904_—_ 

1905._ 

1906 _ 

1907 _•_ 

1908 _ 


$2. 55 
3. 00 
2. 31 
2. 40 
2. 64 


The average for the five years, $2.58 per hundred pounds, or 2.58 
cents per pound. 

On page 295 the same gentleman cites a synopsis, beginning with 
1900-1901, from which he draws the conclusion that the beet-sugar 
production increased by one-half million tons in the eight years. 

If he had included the figures for 1908-9, and begun one year later, 
he would have been able to discover a decrease of about one-half 
million tons in the eight years. The fact that the cane-sugar in¬ 
dustry experienced a considerable decrease during these eight years 
is passed over in silence. 

On page 296 Mr. Hathaway states: 


In spite of the fact that Europe can produce 88-degree sugar and sell it 
profitably at an average of 2 cents per pound (this assertion has just been 
refuted), every producing country considers it necessary to maintain a protect¬ 
ive tariff against cane sugar, which is produced in the Tropics by still cheaper 
wages. 

Among other things, the gentleman then cites the following tariff 
rates: “Austria-Hungary, $2.39 per hundred pounds of raw sugar, 
$3.50 per hundred pounds of refined sugar,” to which he remarks: 


Moreover, an internal additional tax of 32 cents per hundred pounds of refined 
sugar and 30 cents per hundred pounds of raw sugar has to be paid Germany— 
$1.51 per hundred pounds on all sugar. 


As a matter of fact, the duty in Germany and Austria as well as 
elsewhere amounts to 4.40 marks per hundred kilograms of raw sugar 
($0.50 per hundred pounds), and 4.80 marks per hundred kilograms 
of refined sugar (about $0.51 per hundred pounds). 

On page 311 the following dialogue appears: 


Mr. Crumpacker (member of the Committee on Ways and Means). Mr. 
Hathaway, how does the home price in Germany compare with the export price? 

Mr. Hathaway. It is much higher. 

Mr. Crumpacker. What causes this difference? 

Mr. Hathaway. The tariff and “cartel” (trust). 

A difference between the export and home prices based on the tariff 
(meaning customs tariff) and the “ cartel ” does not exist. The 
difference arises solety from the internal tax, which affords no benefit 
to the producer. 

On page 322 Mr. Willet declares that German granulated sugar 
can not be used for consumption in the United States without further 
preparation, and therefore its price is 25 cents below cane sugar and 
15 cents below beet sugar. 

It is doubtful whether the high German granulated brands are not 
immediately fit for American consumption. If this were not the 
case, the fact should be taken into consideration in comparing the 
cost of production of German and American granulated beet sugar, 
for a higher quality naturally necessitates higher cost. 







WAGES IN GERMANY. 


39 


The opinion of Mr. Willet here mentioned is also incorrect in that 
the Americans demand an unsifted granulated sugar, while in Ger¬ 
many the granulated sugar which is exported is sifted in compliance 
with the demand of the English market. We should, of course, omit 
this sifting for the American market, and could without difficulty 
produce the goods required there. Special stress must be laid on this 
point in order that the American Sugar Refining Company may not 
say that nothing is attained by reducing the tariff on granulated sugar 
for the reason that the German article is not suited for the American 
market, anyway. 

On page 344 Mr. Baird quoted the statement of a Magdeburg 
“ friend,” whom he alleges to have said that sugar Avas on the decline 
and the poor devils (meaning the small farmers who sell beets) now 
receive about $3 per ton for beets. 

This statement can hardly have been as quoted. The assertion 
therein contained that 12.60 marks (is paid) for 20 hundredweight 
and only about 0.60 mark per hundredweight is without any founda¬ 
tion and can by no means be applied to Germany in general. Accord¬ 
ing to the official statistics for the beet-sugar seasons, the price paid 
for salable beets in 1902-1908 was 0.98 mark per hundredweight, and 
in 1906-7 the price was 0.84 mark. 

On page 345 Mr. Baird gives the price of 1 pound of sugar intended 
for consumption in Germany at about 6J American cents, while the 
cost of production amounts to about only 2 cents. 

The gentleman forgets here that a high consumption tax is in¬ 
cluded in the 6J cents. HoweA^er, the figures themselves are wrong. 
At 2 cents per pound (about 9.25 marks per 50 kilograms) sugar 
can not be produced for any length of time in Germany at the present 
wages. The selling price is also much too high. Six and one-half 
cents are equal to 27.3 pfennigs per American pound (the German 
pound, as is known, is somewhat heavier). The German price ac¬ 
cording to weight would therefore even perhaps be 28 pfennigs. This 
is a price that has not been attained in Germany in recent years, for 
sugar was always to be had at 22 pfennigs and even cheaper. Baird 
further overlooks the fact that sugar for consumption is a different 
article from that which, in his opinion, can be produced in Germany 
at 2 cents a pound, namely, 88 degree raw sugar. 

When Baird states on the same page that we are satisfied if we 
can only dispose of the by-products of sugar manufacture at a profit. 
This is also a great exaggeration and, applied in so general a way, is 
of course not true. 

Pamphlet 19: On page 2373 the American Sugar Refining Com¬ 
pany claims that the refinement of cane sugar is more expensive than 
that of beet sugar, because cane sugar contains coloring matter which 
can only be eliminated by means of expensive filtration over bone 

charcoal, etc. . . 

Hitherto the exact opposite has always been maintained by those 
interested in cane sugar. The American refiners have constantly 
declared that they prefer cane sugar to beet sugar, and therefore allow 
the former somewhat higher prices when the polarization is eqiial. 
The slight increase in the consumption of bone charcoal in refining 
cane sugar is offset bv the favorable conditions under which cane 
suo-ar crystallizes and by the increased value of the draining sirups. 


40 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


The real beet sugar refinement would seem to be at least as costly as 
the refinement of cane sugar. 

On page 2375 the aforementioned company states that the surtax 
of the Brussels Convention enables the sugar-producing nations of 
the European continent to maintain the price of refined sugar at 
home sufficiently high in order to sell the surplus in the open foreign 
markets at a lower price than sugar could be produced for there. 

It is not true that the price of German refined sugar is kept high at 
home in order to enable it to be exported more cheaply. The opposite 
has been ascertained to be the case (cf. “ Deutsche Zuckerindustrie,” 
1908, p. 1021). “As a matter of fact it frequently occurs now that 
white sugar is sold at home below the par value of the world 
market price, and that, for instance, more can always be obtained for 
a sack of crystalized sugar at London than on the same day in 
Germany.” 

Pamphlet 31: On page 4531 B. G. Wagner, president of the Wis¬ 
consin Sugar Company, says: “ No sugar is exported.” 

This is not exactly correct. There is in fact, some refined sugar 
exported and within the last few weeks even large consignments have 
been made to England. If the American refiners can do this, they 
must either not produce at a greater cost than we in Europe, or they 
are in a position behind the high-tariff walls in the United States to 
make up the loss upon importing. It would then not be the German 
refineries that export at the cost of the home consumer, but the re¬ 
finers in the United States themselves. 

On page 6111 the same gentleman repeats the assertion regarding 
the high European protective tariffs. 

What was said above applies here also. 

On page 6117 Mr. Palmer compiles the European customs duties in 
an appendix to his travel report, without everywhere pointing out 
with sufficient plainness that in most cases, as, for instance, in that of 
Germany, there is included in these duties the consumption tax which 
must also be borne by the home industr}^. 

Schedule G. —Agricultural Products and Provisions, 
dextrin. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Frankfort on the Oder has received 
the following report in connection with pamphlet 31, page 4583: 

The statements made regarding wages, amount of starch contained 
in potatoes, length of time the factories operate, and value of waste 
products as fodder, as a proof of the favorable situation of the 
German potato-starch industry as compared with the American, are 
not correct. The sum of 2 to 3 marks given as the w^ages paid for 
a ten-hour day must be corrected to read 2.50 to 3 marks. The 
German potato, instead of always containing 20 per cent of starch, 
contains only 16 per cent to 21 per cent in some years, according to 
weather conditions, the average for the last four years having been 
18J per cent. The length of time during which German potato-starch 
factories operate is not eight but on an average only four months at 
most. This long period of eight months is cited as a specially favor¬ 
able circumstance for the reason that cattle may be fattened with the 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


41 


waste products of the potatoes during this time, which is impossible 
during the period of only two months during which the season lasts 
in the American potato-starch factories. Against this we will state 
that the waste products can not be used for fattening cattle, and that 
although they are fed, they have very little fodder value, as is shown 
by the fact that when dried they are usually sold for only 5J to 6 
marks per 200 pounds. 

CHICORY. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Nuremberg reports as follows in 
connection with pamphlet —, page 6130, regarding the cost of pro¬ 
duction of chicory: 

The statistical data regarding the cost of production of chicory 
in Germany are entirely erroneous. Likewise the wages given for 
the labor in a factory and agricultural labor are contrary to facts. 

The cost of production and packing of 500 pounds English is as 
follows: 



In Europe. 

In Amer¬ 
ica. 

Wagps ... 

$0.40 instead of $0.15. 

$1.00 

Pa ppr ... 

1.40 instead of 1.20. 

2.25 

Chest 

1.70 instead of 1.20. 

1.70 


3.55 instead of 2.55. 

4.95 


The American wages are probably estimated somewhat too high, 
and the German costs are increased by higher transportation expenses 
and the import duty. 

An untrained factory worker receives at least 3.50 marks for ten 
hours, instead of 1.60; a trained worker receives as high as 4.10 
marks; an untrained female laborer receives 1.75 marks instead of 
0.40; and a trained female laborer 2.20 marks. 

Male agricultural workers are paid 3 marks a day and female 
workers from 1.50 to 2 marks. 


POTATO STARCH. 


The Chamber of Commerce of Frankfort on the Oder reports as 
follows with regard to pamphlet 42, page 6184: 

The prices of German and Dutch potatoes and potato flour cited by 
Mr. T. H. Phair of Presque Isle, Me., as a proof of the necessity of 
protecting the American potato-starch industry, are not correct. The 
price of 8 to 10 cents a bushel for potatoes (about 87 pfennigs per 
hundredweight) could only exist as an exception in years of tremen¬ 
dous crops, and even then only for poor potatoes containing little 
starch. Factorv potatoes cost as follows in Germany per hundred- 


1904- 5 _ 

1905- 6 _ 

1906- 7 _ 

1907- S _ 

190$-9 _ 

At present.. 


2. 50 
1.30 
1. 25 
1. 75 
1 . 60 
1.75 






















42 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


The average price of factory potatoes in Germany during ordinary 
harvests may be taken at 1.50 marks per hundredweight, so that it 
is not so very much cheaper than the price of American potatoes (15 
to 20 cents per bushel or about 1.70 marks per hundredweight). In 
view of the endeavors of German agriculturists to enhance the prices 
of their products under any circumstance, not cheaper but rather on 
an average higher prices may be calculated on in future. 

Corresponding to these prices of raw materials the manufactured 
products are also higher than given by Mr. T. H. Phair. German 
potato starch (export quality) cost on an average as follows: 


Marks. 

1904- 5 _ 29. 25 

1905- 6 _ 19. 75 

1906- 7 _20. 00 

1907- 8 _25. 25 

1908- 9 _22. 25 

At present_23. 00 


The average cost was thus 23.25 marks per 100 kilograms f. o. b. 
Hamburg, or 1.50 marks per 100 kilograms higher freight free New 
York, including marine insurance, while Mr. Phair gives the price 
of $2.20 per 100 pounds (about 19.60 marks) freight free New York. 
Such a price, however, is not to be thought of. 

Using the average price as a basis, German potato flour costs the 
American consumer as follows per 100 kilograms: 

Marks. 


Price f. o. b. Hamburg_23. 25 

Freight and insurance to New York_ 1. 50 

Duty 14 cents a pound___14. 07 


38. 82 

This as against a price for American potato flour of 31 to 4 cents 
a pound (equal on an average to 32.80 marks) per 100 kilograms, 
according to the statement of P. H. Phair. It is therefore a great 
exaggeration to say that a reduction of the tariff would bring about 
the ruin of the American factories and potato growers. 

HOPS. 

[Pamphlet 8, p. 604.] 

[Extracts from a report to the Chamber of Commerce at Nuremberg regarding 

hops.] 

According to an opinion sent to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Nuremberg by a firm engaged in exporting hops to the United States, 
regarding the hearings of Messrs. Horse, Klaber, and Durst, it is 
untrue that the cost of producing hops in America is greater than in 
the continental nations. On the contrary, there is no country in the 
world in which the conditions of production are more favorable than 
in America. While the climate and character of the soil in the Euro¬ 
pean nations necessitate a much more intense application of labor, 
and the hops, especially in spring and in the month of June and July, 
are injured by cold nights and insects, and the crop rendered uncer¬ 
tain, in the excellent climate of California and Oregon the hop almost 
always thrives and crop failures hardly ever occur, as the producers 
themselves admit in their statements. The costs of production in the 
countries of the European continent and England are also consider- 












WAGES IN GERMANY. 


43 


ably higher than in America. In America the average cost of pro¬ 
duction per pound has heretofore been calculated at 7 to 8 cents, and 
never higher than 9 cents. We therefore consider the figures given 
at Washington to be much too high. If the American committee will 
give these figures another careful examination, it will certainly be 
found that the cost of production as given by these gentlemen is far 
too high. Hop raising in the United States is in the hands of large 
producers. The whole system of culture is organized for the produc¬ 
tion of vast quantities at a cheap rate. The picking, which is fre¬ 
quently done there by machinery, and the drying of the hops, are 
done much more rapidly in the excellent climate of California 
and Oregon than here in Europe. Moreover, in America a single 
variety is usually raised, whereas among us very different varieties 
of hops are planted and cultivated, these varieties differing consider¬ 
ably in quality and quantity of yield. In America the variety yield¬ 
ing the greatest quantity is chiefly raised. Therefore the price of 
production in America is about the same with all producers. In 
Germany, Austria, and England conditions are materially different. 
Here vast districts are devoted to the culture of a hop of quality, but 
this quality can only be obtained by ceasing to demand a heavy yield 
per plant and devoting the main effort to raising an article of quality. 
For this reason costs of production in Europe vary considerably. 
Nevertheless it is certain that hops can not be produced in any country 
in Europe under 40 to 50 marks per 100 pounds. The cost of pro¬ 
duction of our cheapest European varieties is therefore higher than 
the cost of production of the average American article. On the other 
hand, the cost of production in our favored Bavarian and Bohemian 
regions ranges from 70 to 80 marks per 100 pounds, or twice as high 
as the American product. Therefore the arguments that hops can 
be produced more cheaply in Europe, and especially in Germany than 
in America, are untenable. Likewise untenable is the assertion of 
Mr. Klaber and associates that a pound of German or Austrian hops 
would take the place of 2 to 2^ pounds of American hops, because the 
German hops are more substantial, and that therefore the tariff of 
12 cents must be raised to 24 cents, because the German hop is twice 
as productive as the American. 

Every brewing expert will declare that the same amount of beer 
can be produced with one pound of American hops as with one pound 
of German hops. However, inasmuch as the American hops have a 
very peculiar taste, different from the German hops, the flavor of the 
beer will be entirely different than if the beer is produced by a mix¬ 
ture of German and American hops. 

Schedule J. —Cotton Manufactures. 

CORSETS. 

A corset manufacturer reports as follows to the Chamber of Com¬ 
merce of Plauen with regard to pamphlet 32, page 4730: 

In general, I should like to remark that all of the statements of the 
Committee on Ways and Means are, in my opinion, made for a pur¬ 
pose —that is, in order to show as great differences as possible between 
the wages in Germany and America and thereby place difficulties in 
the way of a reduction of the tariff. 


44 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


As a matter of fact the present duty on corsets in the United States 
operates in an absolutely prohibitive manner against our article and 
practically prevents its importation. 

Page 4731 (Germany) : I consider the rates of wages given here for 
Germany as being absolutely too low. Good female workers in Ger¬ 
many can, in many cases, earn considerably more, and the average 
earnings of 2.10 marks per day, as given, is entirely too low. The 
average amount earned per day would have to be calculated at 3 
marks at least in this country, provided, of course, that the laborers 
work full time. However, there are a great number of female labor¬ 
ers who earn from 24 to 30 marks and even more per week when work¬ 
ing full time. 

The above data refer to Saxony, and as the wages paid here are, 
perhaps, somewhat lower than in certain larger places where better 
articles are produced, as Cologne, Stuttgart, Cannstatt, etc., the fig¬ 
ures might, at these places, even exceed those given above. 

The statements made that the German corset industry pays 62 cents 
for a working day of twelve to fourteen hours are not in conformity 
with the facts for the reason that in Germany, as is known, the work¬ 
ing hours for female laborers is fixed at eleven hours (on and after 
January 1, 1910, ten hours) as a maximum. The statements made by 
me above regarding the German wages are based on a ten-hour work¬ 
ing day, such as will probably be adopted in most corset factories. 

[Pamphlet 32, p. 4731.] 

The following report has been made to the Chamber of Commerce 
of Stuttgart: 

1. In the report before us regarding a communication of the Corset 
Manufacturers’ Association of the United States we find assertions 
made which are by no means in accordance with the truth as far as 
they refate to wages here. 

We therefore feel called upon to make the following rectifying 
statement, of which we respectfully request you to take note and make 
proper use: 

As a reference is made in the communication to wages paid in 
Connstatt (Cannstatt), we infer, as exporters at this place, that we 
are referred to, and we will hereby state that in the first place there 
are no working days here of twelve to fourteen hours, but only from 
nine to ten hours, and the weekly wages paid are as follows: 

Cutters wlio design models, therefore first-class cutters, up to 60 marks. 

Other skilled cutters, from 25 to 30 marks. 

Skilled sewing women, from 15 to 25 marks. 

Female overseers, from 25 to 40 marks. 

Other female laborers in proportion. 

Besides the legal obligations, such as sick and disability insurance, 
trades unions, etc., the manufacture, especially the manufacture of 
corsets designed for America, involves considerable other expendi¬ 
tures, as only the most skilled hands can be used therein. 

The statements of the Corset Manufacturers’ Association are either 
based on entirely false information or perhaps on data obtained ten 
or more years ago. 

Notwithstanding the exaggerations which the American manufac¬ 
turers take the liberty of making in their communication, our wages 
are not lower than those paid by them. 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


45 


2. The wages given by the American manufacturers for Germany 
may have been correct many years ago, but to-day quite different 
wages are paid, even at places where only staple articles are manu¬ 
factured, as at Oelsnitz, in Saxony, and at Heubach; the wages are not 
materially lower in these places than here, except for high-grade 
laborers, those performing preparatory work, and cutters: 

Skilled sewing women earn here from 14 to 22.50 marks per week. 

Those engaged in ironing and finishing, 18.50 to 30 marks. 

Cutters, 25 to 35 marks. 

First-class cutters, women overseers, etc., still more. 

The selling conditions in America are different than with us, so 
that the goods can be manufactured on a larger scale there than 
here, and the mechanical arrangements are quite different than with 
us, to such an extent that perhaps the difference between the wages 
in the two countries are almost compensated. Moreover, there are 
many more and considerably larger factories run on a large scale in 
this industry in America than in German}^ 

3. The statements of the American corset manufacturers in the 
printed document laid before us are by no means in accordance with 
facts. When they say that the wages paid in Europe amount to 
only a fraction or a third of those paid in the United States, the 
answer to be made is that the wages cited for Germany as a basis 
of these statements are not correct. If these wages were really given 
by four of the most important German factories, this must have 
happened fifteen or twenty years ago, and the fact has not been 
considered that since that time wages have very materially increased 
here. The wages cited for Constatt (by which Cannstatt and there¬ 
fore also Stuttgart are doubtless meant) are absolutely ridiculous, 
for skilled sewing women do not earn from 8 to 12 marks, but from 15 
to 25 marks a week, and skilled cutters, instead of receiving 15 to 20 
marks, earn 25 to 30 marks a week, while master cutters who can de¬ 
sign models receive 50 marks a week, and even more, according to the 
work performed. (Cf. also pamphlet 42, p. 6219.) 

TEXTILE FABRICS. 

The following has been reported to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Chemnitz regarding pamphlet 32, page 4747: 

The National Association says: 

Page 4750: “ The living expenses of the American laborer have in¬ 
creased at least 25 per cent within eleven years since the last tariff 
went into force.” 

The living expenses of the Saxon stocking weaver have increased 
at least to the same extent as those of the American laborer, and per¬ 
haps to a greater extent. . . , . 

p a g e 4749: The report of the National Association speaks ot the 
cottage industry—that is, the industry in private houses in the vil¬ 
lages of Erzgebirge. The yarns related about starvation wages, un¬ 
limited hours of labor, and the cooperation of the whole family be¬ 
long entirely to the past. For years there has ceased to be any cot¬ 
tage industry in the manufacture of stockings, these articles being 
now made only in factories, large and small. The income of the 
laborers has been greatly increased owing to improved machinery, 
and it may be even said to have doubled. An average earning of 27 


46 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


to 30 marks per week may be taken as the rule, but weekly wages of 50 
to 60 marks are not rare. The hours of labor are regulated by law, 
and are less than in other industries, being about fifty-nine hours a 
week. To the wages must be added the not inconsiderable burdens, 
which have come about from the social laws, and which also exercise 
an influence on the costs of production of the article. All these are 
things which are unknown in the United States. 

Page 4T52: It is further stated that as a result of a strike last sum¬ 
mer the Saxon stocking manufacturers had obtained a 25 per cent 
reduction in the wage schedule. 

Page 4750: Furthermore, the Saxon manufacturers are accused by 
the National Association of deceiving the customs authorities by false 
declarations, etc. 

Every word of such talk as this is a fabrication. There is neither 
such a thing as “ averaging”—that is, the invoicing of two articles of 
different values at an average price—nor is there any issuing of false 
invoices and the like. All goods going away from here are perma¬ 
nently sold. No goods are sold on consignment. 

The appraisers at New York know the manufacturers and their 
goods so well that no one could undertake to make false declarations. 
Every person acquainted with facts knows that hardly any differences 
have occurred since Mr. Lloyd has been at the head of the hosiery 
appraisers at New York. Most of the goods purchased here go 
directly to large American dry goods houses, first-class firms, who 
would not be guilty of making underdeclarations to the American 
Government. Underdeclarations are also considered dishonest among 
German manufacturers, and it is a malicious slander on the part of 
the National Association to assert the contrary. 

Page 4767: In conclusion, we will refer to the letter written by 
Mr. McCarthy, of the firm of Levi, Strauss & Co., of San Francisco, 
to the Ways and Means Committee. We can state that we agree 
entirely with its contents. 

This letter is the only report of our adversaries among the hearings 
before the Ways and Means Committee which represents the great 
consuming public instead of the one-sided interests of a few American 
manufacturers. 

The National Association of Hosiery and Underwear Manufac¬ 
turers selected four examples in its communication to the Ways and 
Means Committee, in which it compares the costs of production in 
Germany and America of four kinds of hose, and arrives at the con¬ 
clusion that the German article after paying the duty is still much 
cheaper in America than the home product. Consequently it argues 
that the latter should be protected by still higher duties. We will 
assume that the statement of the costs of production in America is 
correct (it is certainly, not too low) and will argue from this stand¬ 
point. The data regarding'the cost of production in Germany, how¬ 
ever, are false in every respect, being in part misrepresented in a most 
frivolous manner and in part drawn from imagination without any 
foundation whatever. All the selling prices named for the four kinds 
of articles mentioned are too low, and consequently the ad valorem 
duties levied thereon are given much too low. Some articles of this 
kind may have been sold temporarily by some manufacturers at these 
prices last summer, but only by persons who had to have money at 
any price. These were forced sales and not regular business deals. 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


47 


The wages given for Saxony are entirely false and without any 
foundation. They were simply set at 30 per cent of the American 
wages, buch an unwarranted procedure can not be taken in earnest 
and is its own judge. It is a characteristic sample of the reliability 
of these reports as a whole. 

The costs of yarn, pasteboard boxes, packing, and chests are also 
entirely wrong, made out of whole cloth, and much too low. 

The mill expenses which were set at 13 cents (52 pfennigs) in Geiv 
many are in reality much higher and very little lower than in 
America. 

We reproduce the four examples in the appendix, give the data of 
the National Association, and place opposite them the real costs of 
production in Saxony. This compilation was made by us most ac¬ 
curately and conscientiously. We will mention in this connection 
that the Americans include under “ wages ” all wages paid in the 
manufacture of the article, including supervision, making up, stor- 
ing, packing, etc. Any data procured from here over there regarding 
wages have never represented anything but the actual wages paid for 
weaving. In our compilation we have been careful to conform 
exactly to the American scheme, in order to secure an absolute 
comparison. 

We will mention, further, that the American manufacturers have 
mostly new, broad machines of 20 to 24 parts, while in many cases 
old machines of 12 to 18 parts are in use here, to the operators of 
which correspondingly higher wages are naturally paid. 

The four examples cited were, of course, selected by the National 
Association purposely in order to make the costs of production 
in America appear specially high. They relate to goods the manu¬ 
facture of which can only be introduced witli difficult}^ into America, 
goods which are produced on specially delicate and not easily operated 
machines, for which there is still a scarcity of trained hands in 
America. In order to attract such skilled workmen, however, it is 
necessary to pay abnormally high wages for these experimental ar¬ 
ticles, so that the weekly wages paid to a weaver come to $28 to $31, 
as stated in the hearings. This, however, is by no means the rule, the 
weekly earnings averaging about $15 to $17, as we have learned 
reliably from workers who have been employed for many years in 
American factories. If the examples selected had related to those 
kinds of hose which are already being manufactured in the United 
States in enormous quantities, such as 27-gauge and 30-gauge articles, 
woolen stockings, and seamless hosiery, quite different results would 
have been obtained. 

It may be asserted and proven at once that the American produc¬ 
tion of these articles is so much in the lead and so cheap that even 
now it is impossible to import it from Germany. Furthermore, only 
articles made of Egyptian cotton were selected as an example, and 
this cotton must first be imported to America, its price being in¬ 
creased by freight and duty. If the articles made of American cot¬ 
ton, which predominate by far, had been selected the costs of pro¬ 
duction would even then have been much more favorable to America. 

From our comparison it will be seen that, even in the four examples 
which the National Association purposely selected as the most favor¬ 
able to it, the American product is more than abundantly protected 


48 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


by the existing tariff, that these high rates render the goods excess¬ 
ively dear to the purchasing public, and that a reduction in the tariff 
is absolutely necessary in the interest of the consumer. 


To the Presidency or the Chamber of Commerce, 

Chemnitz. 

The National Association of Hosiery and Underwear Manufac¬ 
turers. in their report to the Ways and Means Committee, selected 
four examples of hose, for comparing German and American costs 
of production, and concludes therefrom that German merchandise 
with the duty added is still a great deal cheaper in America than the 
domestic product. In consequence the latter must need be protected 
by still higher duties. We will assume the statements of the Ameri¬ 
can costs of production to be correct (they are surely not too low) 
and start from this basis. But the figures for the German costs of 
production are wrong in every particular, and partly misrepresented 
in a grossly unscrupulous manner, and, for the other part, purely 
invented without any data to go on. 

The selling prices, quoted for ever}^ one of the four specimens, are 
too low, and consequently the ad valorem duties levied upon them 
are stated much too low, also. Similar lines may temporarily have 
been sold last summer at similar prices by a few manufacturers; but, 
as stated in our previous communication, only on the part of people 
who were obliged to find money at any price. Such transactions were 
of the nature of compulsory realizations and not regular trading. 

Absolutely wrong, and lacking all foundation, are the quotations 
of Saxon wages. They have simply been entered at 30 per cent of 
the American rates. A procedure so entirely lacking any kind of 
foundation can not be taken seriously, and condemns itself. It stig¬ 
matizes the credibility of the entire report. 

The figures for yarn, boxes, packing, and cases are also quite wrong, 
assumed at random regardless of any facts, and much too low. 

The mill expenses, entered at $13 for Germany, are, as a matter of 
fact, much higher and only a trifle under the American. 

Now, we report the four specimens in the inclosed exhibit, giving 
the figures of the National Association, and confront them with the 
real Saxon costs of production. This statement has been compiled 
by us with the greatest accuracy and conscientiousness. 

We would point out that, under the item “ wages,” the Americans 
comprise all wages, expended in the product, including examining, 
boarding, folding, packing, etc. Any statements of wages which 
may have been received in America from this side have always repre¬ 
sented the mere knitting wages alone. 

In our statement we have exactly followed the American form, in 
order to arrive at an entirely corresponding comparison. 

We further point out that American manufacturers mostly pos¬ 
sess new, wide 20 to 24 at once machines; whereas, to a large "extent 
older 12 to 18 at once machines are operated here, and on these the 
wages are, of course, proportionately higher. 

The four examples put forward by the National Association have, 
of course, been intentionally chosen so as to make the American 



WAGES IN GERMANY. 


49 


product appear as dear as possible. They refer to goods, the manu¬ 
facture of which on that side can only be domesticated with difficulty, 
and that are produced on especially fine complicated machines, for 
the operation of which it is that skilled hands are at present fiot 
forthcoming. 

To develop this class of workmen abnormally high wages must be 
paid for such experimental lines, and this has originated the weekly 
wage figures for knitters of $28 to $31 cited in the hearings. But, 
as a matter of fact, these are by no means the rule; the average weekly 
earnings amount to $15 to $17, as we know reliably from workmen 
who have spent years in American factories. Had the example been 
drawn from hose, such as are already being produced in vast masses 
in the States, for 27 and 30 gauge goods, woolen stockings, and seam¬ 
less hosiery, entirely different conclusions would have been arrived at. 

It can be absolutely maintained and proved that in these directions 
American manufacturers are so superior and cheap that any importa¬ 
tion from Germany is impossible even to-day. Further, it deserves 
remark that only lines of Egyptian cotton were chosen. This material 
has to be first imported into America and is enhanced by carriage 
and duty. If the largely preponderating lines of American cotton 
had been selected, the cost of production in America would have 
appeared in a far more favorable light. 

Our comparative figures will show that even in the four specimens 
cited bv the National Association deliberately as the least favorable 
to themselves American manufacturers are more than sufficiently pro¬ 
tected by the existing duties; that these heavy rates unduly enhanced 
the price of merchandise for the purchasing public; and that, in 
the interests of the consumer, a reduction of the duties should be 
emphatically demanded. 

Respectfully, - -• 


To the Presidency of the Cham her of Commerce, 

Chemnitz: 

The statements made by the North American hosiery manufac¬ 
turers before the Ways and Means Committee in Washington with a 
view to revision of the Dingley tariff, kindly submitted to us, have 
been subjected to an accurate examination on the part of the presiding 
members of the Knitting Manufacturers’ Union, and in their name I 
have to depose the following: 

Among the parties who have made statements, a certain Mr. Waring 
plays a leading part. This gentleman is an individual sufficiently 
known here, formerly representative of a large Chemnitz exporting 
house, now agent for a number of American manufacturers. It has 
always been his aim to constitute the lines carried by him a monopoly, 
to the exclusion of competition by any and all means. 

On the part of the American Hosiery Company it is maintained— 

That the system of protective-tariff legislation had brought incomparable 
prosperity upon the country. 

The economic growth of the United States of North America is 
more probably owing in the main to the inexhaustible natural re¬ 
sources of the country and the rapid increase of the population. 
These circumstances originated the large consumptive power and at 

4731—S. Doc. 68, 61-1, pt 2-4 




50 


WAGES IN GERMAN V. 


the same time the development of extensive home manufacturing, the 
latter unduly protected by high duties. 

The report of the National Association of Hosiery and Underwear 
Manufacturers recognizes in the growth of imports of German hosiery 
a serious interference with home manufacturing. 

Let it be first pointed out that, according to the statements of this 
very report, this importation increased inconsiderably in the period 
from 1903 to 1900; for three years the amount fluctuated between 
$8,000,000 and $9,000,000, and only rose to $11,000,000 at the highest 
point of the economic boom in 1907. But the report is silent as to 
the degree in which domestic production rose during the same period, 
and more especially in 1907. The home production is merely quoted 
at $50,000,000. In like measure, as exports rose in 1907 they will be 
found to have fallen in 1909 in consequence of economic depression. 

The demand- for still higher protection on the part of North Ameri¬ 
can manufacturers is not dictated by way of self-defense against 
foreign manufacturers, but aims at their entire exclusion. It is not 
merely the desire for protection on what is alread}^ being manufac¬ 
tured—for the present duty quite suffices to render foreign competi¬ 
tion quite out of the question—but still higher duties are to render it 
possible to seize even such small portion as can not yet be manufac¬ 
tured owing to the lack of suitable operatives in the States. Higher 
duties are not intended to benefit the working classes, as has been 
agitated; they are merely to gorge the pockets of a few manufacturers, 
raise the price of the article, and render an indispensable necessity 
dearer for the benefit of a few individuals, to the detriment of the 
general public. 

The National Association—in other words, Mr. Waring—states that 
American hosiery mills are only working 3 to 4 days a week, and 
holds German competition responsible. That is an absolute misrepre¬ 
sentation of facts. After the financial crisis of October and Novem¬ 
ber, 1907, demand shrank enormously; stocks are excessive even to-day, 
owing to previous speculation; during 1908 orders placed were of the 
smallest, something like 30 per cent of the previous year in Saxony. 

The absence of orders compelled many machines here to lie idle, 
hours of labor to be curtailed, and hands to be discharged. Both 
manufacturing markets suffer under the same causes. 

The National Association goes on to say: 

The cost of living has gone up at least 25 per cent during the past 
years, since the last tariff came into force for the American workman. 

The tariff rates, put into force eleven years ago, are alleged to offer 
insufficient protection to American produce to-day. On the contrary, 
these rates provide more protection now than they did then, for goods 
have been cheapened, both on this side and that, by perfected methods 
of manufacturing; but the duties have remained the same, and being 
largely of a specific nature, at so much per dozen, they constitute, pro 
rata, a heavier impost on the cheaper product of to-day than they did 
on the more expensive of eleven years ago. 

The cost of living has risen at least to the same extent for the Saxon 
workman as for the American—I should say, if anything, to a greater 
extent. The report of the National Association speaks of the cottage 
industry in the villages of the Erzgebirge. The fairy tales there 
cited, as to starvation wages, unlimited working hours, the coopera¬ 
tion of all the members of a family, belong entirely to the past. It 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


51 


is years since any cottage labor has existed in the stocking trade. 
Manufacturing is only carried on in factories, some larger, some 
smaller. 

The income of the working people has been greatly raised by per¬ 
fected machinery; it may be asserted that it has doubled. An aver- 
age wage of 27 to 30 marks a week may be regarded as a rule, but 
even earnings of 50 to GO marks a week are not uncommon. 

The hours of labor are restricted by law and are less than in other 
trades, being about fifty-nine hours per week. To the wages must 
be added the expenses, not inconsiderable, imposed by social legisla¬ 
tion, which affect the cost of production of merchandise. All this is 
unknown in the States. 

Next the assertion is made that Saxon hosiery mills put through a 
25 per cent cut in wages last summer through a strike. 

This is not true. The strike was due to local causes, remained con¬ 
fined to a few villages, and evinced no reduction of wages to any 
appreciable extent. 

Onl} r some small discrepancies were abolished. The entire strike 
was only a trial of strength called forth by the social-democratic 
organization. 

Cheap sales of stockings certainly occurred last summer, but, as 
stated in my former report, they were not due to cheaper cost of 
production, but simply forced sales on the part of manufacturers, 
who had to find money at any cost. Such sales are, or were, tempo¬ 
rary phenomena; a continuance would have ruined the parties in ques¬ 
tion. No law can prevent such sales; they have nothing whatever to 
do with the cost of production, and can not be made the basis for 
fixing the rates of duty for a number of years. Furthermore it was 
stated that— 

The Saxon wages amounted to 30 per cent of the American, and a number of 
wage items of American mills are enumerated. 

Both statements are wrong. The Saxon wages have been taken at 
much too low a figure. Doubtless wage reports sent in by the Ameri¬ 
can consul here are assumed. These are one-sided, apply only to a 
few single, specially selected, cheap lines, and originate from a few 
nonrepresentative small manufacturers. On the part of Chemnitz 
manufacturers information was declined to the consul. The state¬ 
ment of German wages, it should be said, only quotes the mere knit¬ 
ting wages, whereas the American rates comprise many wage items, 
subsequent to the knitting process; this circumstance renders a com¬ 
parison difficult, and for the above reason alone the comparative state¬ 
ment is incorrect. The knitting wages for the same article differ in 
this market also because old and new machines of entirely differing 
efficiency are employed. The American statement of Saxon wages 
considers the lowest rates, which only apply to the very latest ma¬ 
chines. 

The American wages and weekly earnings that are quoted apply in 
nearly every case only to lines that are only manufactured in America 
to a small extent. 

A weekly wage of $30 is quoted for a knitter. That sum does not 
represent an average. Wages of this height are only commanded on 
the finest machines, and it is just these that can not be successfully 
introduced into America, owing to the lack of skilled hands. These 


52 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


fine machines are at present quite exceptional, and by aid of enormous 
duties to the fabric they produce their general introduction is to be 
compassed. 

Among all the wage statements submitted to the Ways and Means 
Committee there is only one, signed by Leo E. Boyden, giving wages 
for lines produced in the States to a larger extent. According to this 
the knitter earns $16 to $18 a week. That we have ascertained to be 
a correct average. The other examples have been selected from lines 
that have only been made experimentally and for which dispropor¬ 
tionate wages have been paid in order to attract skilled knitters. 
These wages apply to 39 and 42 gauge goods, whereas American 
manufacturers at present mainly operate 27 to 33 gauge machines. 

A supplementary report to the present will follow in a few days, in 
which we shall deal with the wages more fully and submit figures 
contradicting them. We shall also refute the four examples in 
which the National Association compares American and Saxon manu¬ 
facturing. Everything is wrongly stated in these examples. I have 
not sufficient time to-day to put together and sift the documentary 
evidence. 

A statement was also made to the effect that the duty paid by the 
German manufacturers on English yarns was refunded in exporting 
the goods made from them. 

This is an absolutely untrue statement. There is no such thing as 
refunding duties in Germany. The National Association further 
charges Saxon manufacturers with circumventing the custom-house 
by means of false declarations, etc. 

Every word uttered in this direction is a bare lie. There is no 
such thing as the alleged averaging, i. e., invoicing two lines of dif¬ 
ferent values at a middle price, nor are false invoices, etc., made out. 
All the goods sent from here are bona fide sold. No consignments 
are made. 

The appraisers in New York are so well acquainted with the 
manufacturers and their goods that no one could venture to make 
a false declaration. Everyone familiar with the conditions knows 
that since Mr. Lloyd has been at the head of the hosiery appraise¬ 
ments discrepancies have hardly occurred. Most of the goods pur¬ 
chased here go direct to large American drv-goods houses, firms of 
the very first standing, who would not make themselves guilty of 
undervaluations toward the American Government. In like manner 
undervaluations are regarded as dishonorable among manufacturers 
here, and it is a bare libel on the part of the National Association 
to assert the contrary. 

In conclusion, I should like to refer to the letter written by Mr. 
McCarthy, of Levi Strauss & Co., San Francisco, to the Ways and 
Means Committee. We can indorse its entire contents. 

Among the hearings before the Ways and Means Committee this 
letter is up to now the only statement made by the other party, the 
only statement guarding the interests not of a few American manu¬ 
facturers in a partisan spirit but of the large consuming public. 

A demand should certainly be made for more utterances on this 
side of the question. The importers of hosiery located in the United 
States should also express themselves. Up to now the inquiry before 
the Ways and Means Committee has assumed an entirely one-sided 
character. 

Kespect fully, -. 




WAGES IN GERMANY. 


53 


FABRIC GLOVES (SILK). 

The following report is made to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Chemnitz in reference to pamphlet 23, page 2005: 

Mr. Julius Kayser, proprietor of the most important American 
fabric glove factory, made statements before the Committee on Ways 
and Means at Washington regarding the conditions of production in 
this branch of business which in part are not in conformity with the 
facts. Among other things he claims that the income of the working 
women in Saxony who are employed in making fabric gloves is not 
over 8 to 9 marks per week of sixty hours’ labor as against $8 to $9 
for fifty-five hours' work in America. These assertions are incorrect, 
and one of our informers can show from his books that his employees 
earn from 11 to 13 marks during the aforesaid length of time, and he 
knows that this is also the case in most of the other factories of this 
kind. 

If wages are paid at the rate of 8 to 9 marks, the persons receiving 
them must be either unskilled workers or those who perform certain 
labor connected with the manufacture of very cheap but by no means 
silk gloves. 

Mr. Kayser is said to have further stated that the Saxon manufac¬ 
turers are inclined to make inferior goods and that it would be better 
for the American public if pure silk gloves from Saxony did not come 
at all to America, owing to their inferior quality. 

This charge is also absolutely untenable. The high protective tariff 
of 60 per cent ad valorem and free importation of the raw material of 
themselves prevent any exportation to America. If these articles by 
way of exception were able to be exported for once in considerable 
quantities, as was the case during the last seasons, there is a special 
reason for this, entirely disconnected with the quality of the goods. 
Such a case can only occur when the American manufacturers are 
unable to supply the demand, as occurred during the last two years, 
owing to the fashion for long gloves, which required a tremendous 
increase in material. 

Such a condition of the market had never occurred before and will 
hardly occur again. 

COTTON HOSE. 

The ---reports as follows in addition to its previous 

statements: 

In the proposed revision of the tariff the intention has frequently 
and distinctly been expressed of making the duty high enough in 
order to offset the difference in wages in Germany and the United 
States. In two typical kinds of ordinary ladies’ hose, such as are now 
produced in the United States and on which the American manufac¬ 
turers demand considerable increases in duty, the actual wages of the 
knitters have now been obtained as paid in one of the most prominent 
factories of regular hose in the United States (Fort Wayne, Ind.). 

A comparison with wages paid in Germany shows the result fol¬ 
lowing. 



54 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Knitters' wages, per dozen. 



Fort 

Wayne. 

Chem¬ 

nitz. 

Ladies’ cotton hose, 33 gauge: 

Up p’s _ .. . 

Cents. 

20 

9 

6 

5 

8 

5 

Marks. 

0.34 

.17 

.13 

.09 

.20 

.07 

Feet . 

Tunning - ... . 

Looping . 

Sewing. 

Mending. 

Total. . 

53 

1.00 



EXAMPLE 1. 

Marks. 

Cost in Chemnitz_1- 00 

Duty on this article, at least 65 cents_'2. 60 

Expense of shipment to New York_____ ■ 28 


Total_._3. 88 

Cost to American manufacturer_2. 22 

Difference in favor of American manufacturer___1. 66 


Note. —About 40 cents, or 21 per cent, when this article is sold at $1.90. 



Fort 

Wayne. 

Chem¬ 

nitz. 

Ladies’ lisle hose, 39 gauge: 

Legs. 

Cents. 

34 

14 

8 

6 

9 

6 

Marks. 

0.57 
.19 
.17 
.12 
.24 
.08 

Feet. 

Topping. 

Lsoping. 

Sewing.. 

Mending. 

Total. 

77 

1.37 



EXAMPLE 2. 

Marks. 

Cost in Chemnitz_1. 37 

Duty on this article, at least 85 cents_3. 57 

Expense of shipment to New York_ . 28 


Total___5. 22 

Cost to American manufacturer__3. 23 


Difference in favor of American manufacturer_2. 00 


Notej—A bout 48 cents, or 12 per cent when this article is sold at $4. 

These two examples show clearly and distinctly that the present 
duty more than insures the North American manufacturer against 
the competition of Chemnitz, and that this duty would have to be 
reduced if the proposed plan were carried out in the new tariff—that 
is, if the duty were merely to offset the difference in the cost of pro¬ 
duction in Europe and America. 

These two examples were by no means selected as being favorable 
to us, they representing the two most usual kinds of regular fine 
stockings manufactured in the United States, and are the very two 
kinds about which the American manufacturers are fighting and in 
which they wish to drive us out of the market. 

It has further been ascertained that the weekly wages of the 
knitters at Fort Wayne amount to about $16 to $18, while the Ameri¬ 
can manufacturers mention $28 to $31 in their statements before the 
Ways and Means Committee. These were therefore very exceptional 
cases, as stated above, and not average wages. 






















































WAGES IN GERMANY. 


55 


The undersigned firms hereby declare that the goods mentioned in 
examples 1 to 4 of the report of the Union of Textile Fabric Manu¬ 
facturers of Chemnitz and Vicinity, dated February 5 of this year, 
were not sold by them more cheaply than as given below: 

Example 1. —Men’s 39-gauge lisle half hose, 2/60r combed Egyptian lisle, 
1 pound English, 6 to 6.55 marks, 4 per cent. 

Example 2. —Lads’ 36-gauge cotton hose, l/20r combed Egyptian yarn (AAP), 
1 pound 14 ounces, 6.30 to 6.55 marks. 

Example 3. —Lads’ 39-gauge lisle hose, 2.70r combed Egyptian lisle, 1 pound 
6 ounces, not below 8 marks. 

Example —Lads’ 39-gauge lisle hose, 2.70r combed Egyptian lisle, 1 pound 
6 ounces, mercerized, not below S.75 marks. 

Chemnitz, February 8 , 1909. 

[Six signatures (illegible).] 

I hereby certify that while my prices for the goods mentioned 
below have been very considerably higher during the past years, my 
present selling prices for these articles are as follows, and I further 
hereby certify that I have not sold any of these goods below the prices 
given herewith. These prices include 4 per cent cash discount. In 
cases in which 5 per cent discount would be given these prices would 
be correspondingly higher. 

Example I. —Men’s 39-gauge lisle half-hose, 2/60, 1 English pound, 6.05 marks, 
less 5 per cent cash discount, to 6.20 marks, less 4 per cent cash discount. 

Example II. —Lads’ 36-gauge hose, 1/20 combed Egyptian, 1 English pound 
14 ounces, 6.30 marks, less 4 per cent cash discount, to 6.40 marks, less 4 per 
cent cash discount. 

Example III. —Lads’ 39-gauge combed lisle hose, 2/70, 1 English pound 6 
ounces, 7.85 marks, less 4 per cent cash discount, to 8.10 marks, less 4 per cent 
cash discount. 

Example IV. —Lads’ 39-gauge mercerized combed lisle hose, 2/70, 1 English 
pound 6 ounces, 7.85 marks, less 4 per cent cash discount, to 9.50 marks, less 4 
per cent cash discount. 

Chemnitz, Febmia/ry 4, 1909. 

COTTON FABRICS. 

[Pamphlet 23, p. 3120.] 

The Chamber of Commerce of Augsburg makes the following 
statement on the basis of inquiries made: 

Regarding the taxation of damask Mr. Paterson, director of the 
Rosemary Manufacturing Company, at Roanoke Rapids, N. C., was 
heard as an interested party (cf. pamphlet 23, pp. 3120-3122). He 
declares that the present tariff on damask goods, amounting to 40 per 
cent ad valorem, is sufficient for ordinary damask, but not. for mercer¬ 
ized damask, and asks for an increase to 50 per cent ad valorem for 
the latter. He bases his demand in the main on the assertion that 
the increased tariff protection must serve as an offset against the 
excessively cheap wages paid for labor in foreign countries. He 
claims that the difference in the wages is a determining factor in 
this case, because the mercerization is but a process requiring further 
labor, and that no more goods are furnished, but merely a more 
highly elaborated article. 

In contrast to this we are able to answer as follows, on the basis 
of data furnished us by: 

The mercerization of damasks consists in soaking the cotton threads 
in a sort of caustic-soda lye and then stretching them, whereby they 


56 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


are given a silky luster; otherwise they are exactly like ordinary 
damasks. The demand of Mr. Paterson is based in the first place on 
incorrect suppositions, inasmuch as he claims that the wages are a 
determining factor in the costs of mercerization. This is incorrect, 
for the amount invested in the special machines used in mercerizing 
is so great that the wages paid for the labor involved almost entirely 
disappear in the calculation. Moreover, according to the present 
quotations of the open market, mercerizing does not cost 150 per cent 
more than ordinary bleaching, but onty about 60 per cent to 80 per 
cent. However, the expenses of bleaching or of bleaching and mer¬ 
cerizing only constitute, generally speaking, a small portion of the 
total cost, for the bleaching of damask worth 50.60 pfennigs per 
meter costs about 4 to 4J pfennigs, and the bleaching and merceriz¬ 
ing together about 7 pfennigs. According to this the grounds 
alleged by Mr. Paterson for a 10 per cent tariff increase would seem 
not to be tenable, for the mercerization does not cost 10 per cent of 
the value of these goods, but only about 5 per cent. The demand of 
this interested party, according to our information, is probably 
chiefly explainable by the fact that his enterprise is situated in North 
Carolina, a manufacturing district whose products have increased 
to an unreasonable extent within recent years. 

COTTON FABRIC GLOVES. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Chemnitz sends the following state¬ 
ment in answer to the petitions on page 6236, pamphlet 42: 

The petitioners endeavor to justify their requests on the basis of 
two different examples, but it must be remarked in this connection 
that it is useless to refer to an article of 2/160r gauze, for the reason 
that such a quality is neither manufactured here nor demanded over 
there, so that it is incomprehensible how this example could have 
been used. The other article cited in comparison, made of l/80r 
yarn, represents on the contrary a sort which is needed and sold in 
great quantities, but nevertheless even in this case it is quite impos¬ 
sible to derive any kind of a clear idea from this calculation, which is 
based on only four items, and in such a superficial form can not be 
verified. There would therefore be no purpose in examining the 
separate items, and the only thing to do is to subject the final result 
to criticism and to point out the obvious errors therein. The report 
in question gives the value of the yarn contained in 1 dozen as 40 
cents in America, while the report sent bv the American consul here 
regarding this item mentions 24 cents. 

That 1 dozen cotton fabric gloves, finished as they generally are 
when offered for sale, and as those on which the foregoing calculation 
is based seem to be, can not be produced here for 25 cents, or 1.04 
marks, was proven already in the last report. 

The increased cost amounts to about 30 per cent and would be much 
higher in the case of better articles. The figures, as far as they rep¬ 
resent the production in Germany, are altogether too low and those 
for the American products are probably too high. 

The statement is also wrong that 1 dozen gloves which it costs 80 
cents, or 3.36 marks, to produce here are usually sold over there for 
$1.50 to $1.75 by the wholesale merchants. If we consider the ex¬ 
penses of packing, which would constitute at least 10 per cent of the 
price as given, and also a very modest profit for the manufacturer, 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 57 

the price of such an article would necessarily be $1.00 and could not 
be ^old below $1.85 to $2., 

The whole calculation appears superficial and arbitrary and can 
not be used for an honest comparison. 

WORSTED. 

In connection with pamphlet 84, page 4998, a manufacturer be¬ 
longing to the Chamber of Commerce of Dresden reports as follows: 

1 he statements regarding the wages of German workmen are 
incorrect. A German spinner earns on an average 80 marks a week, 
and not, as alleged in the report on page 4999, 27.10 francs. In 
comparing American wages with German wages it must also be 
taken into consideration that the American employer immediately 
discharges a certain number of workmen when business becomes 
slack, while the German employer endeavors to keep his workmen 
even through dull business periods. The American workman must 
endeavor to insure himself to a certain extent against idleness bj 7 
means of higher wages. 

CARPETS. 

With regard to the statement made in pamphlet 24, page 8284, 
and pamphlet 84, pages 4982, 5009, a Saxon manufacturer hands to 
the Chamber of Commerce of Plauen the following report, which he 
transmitted to the American consul at that place at his request: 

With a view to conveying a clear notion to the German mandatories 
for their negotiations with the representatives of the United States 
of America, we feel we can not do better than to start from the 
American manufacture, of which 1 Amaxin rug 9 by 12 feet bought 
in St. Louis at $84 stands at our disposal. 

Before going any further into the matter, it is well to point out 
that said carpet bought to measure 9 by 12 feet equals 108 square 
feet—12 square yards—but measures only 8.11 by 11.8 feet, equaling 
104 square feet—Ilf square yards. However, as it would render 
things too complicated, we adhere to the nominal measurement. 

As our United States traveler informs us, this carpet was made 
in Auburn, X. Y., and costs in the factory there $84. 

The carpet corresponds to our staple quality “ Prima,” in English- 
speaking countries being known by the name of “ Saxony.” 

The texture is exactly the same, and although the quality of the 
wool is somewhat different—our wool material being a little finer and 
better—one can fairly say that, on the whole, it is the same manu¬ 
facture, and the original cost of manufacture is the same, too, for 
both qualities. 

Considering that, as the inclosed calculation shows, the carpet costs 
us $14.4fi and we are getting for it, duty and freight excluded, $18.90, 
it yields a gross profit of $4.44, which makes approximately 28 per 
cent gross profit. 

However, this gross profit of 23 per cent is rendered illusive by 
our naturally being obliged to pay from it to our United States 
travelers and representatives (1) fixed salary, (2) office rent, and (3) 
commission on sales. The exact total of these expenses can not be 
given, as it varies every year according to the bigger or smaller turn- 


58 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


over; if the turnover is small, however, these expenses bear so heavily 
on the profit as to absorb it entirely, leaving no balance in our favor. 

It appears clearly, therefore, that the present law relating to cus¬ 
toms is placing the United States manufacturer in an unassailable 
position, and there can be no question about his being able also to 
procure all materials, such as wool, and particularly cotton, that 
grows in his own country—in short, all yarns—at as low a figure as 
ourselves, and as the machinery for the carpet industry is being built 
in the United States themselves it is evident that he can get this, too, 
as advantageously as ourselves, if not cheaper still. 

The only point open would be that he might have to pay higher 
wages. Our better class workmen and weavers are earning $1 a day 
and a little more. 

As regards this carpet, therefore, the American manufacturer is 
placed more favorabty than ourselves by $20. and if the present exor¬ 
bitant duty were to be lowered to-morrow 50 per cent, he would still 
have the start of us by $10 per carpet, and the inclosed calculation 
proves exactly that the European manufacturer can not possibly 
come up with him. 

In order to avoid all confusion and misunderstanding, we have 
abstained from calculating also other carpet qualities, but beg to point 
out that all our other products are being calculated in the same way 
and at the same percentages. 

American carpet square 17/4 Amaxin, Auburn, N. Y., ought to 
be 9 by 12, 108 square feet, 12 square yards, but is only 8.11 by 11.8, 
104 square feet, Ilf square yards; is too little by 4 square feet, 
f square yards. 

This Amaxin rug costs in the factory at Auburn, N. Y., $34. 

The same carpet square of our manufacture, 17/4, 9 by 12, 12 square 

yards, Prima Axminster, for United States called Saxony, costs in the 


factory at Oelsnitz 78.30 marks_$18. 90 

12 square yards, at 90 cents_$10.80 

40 per cent ad valorem_ 7.56 

Freight and expenses_ 1.94 

- 20.30 


39. 20 

Cost of manufacture in the factory at Oelsnitz. 


Marks. 

Woolen yarn, English worsted, 7,000 grams_ 22. 40 $5. 40 

Chenille wages_ 6 . 40 1. 54 

Other yarns: Jute, cotton, linen (for back, 10,800 grams)_ 10.20 2.45 

Power-loom wages_ 10 . 50 2. 53 

Gropping and starching__ .80 .20 

Packing in oilcloth._ 1. 50 .36 


51. 80 12. 48 

General mill charges, wherein are included all costs of officials 
and clerks, coal, supplies and repairs, taxes, interest on in¬ 
vestment, depreciation, insurance_ 8 . 20 1 . 98 


Grand total cost_ 60. 00 14. 46 


The commission for the United States traveler, which differs ac¬ 
cording to the annual returns, increases this grand total cost accord¬ 
ingly. 


















WAGES IN GERMANY. 


59 


Schedule K (Wool). 

[Statements of the Chamber of Commerce of Augsburg regarding the carding 
wool and worsted industry. 1 

WOOL INDUSTRY. 

[Pamphlet 24, pp. 3308, 3348.] 

According to the facts learned by the Chamber of Commerce of 
Augsburg, the repeated statement of the expert, Mr. William Whit¬ 
man (pamphlet 24, pp. 3308 and 3348), that the wages paid in the 
carding wool and worsted industry in Germany are only one-third 
those paid in the United States, is incorrect and must be refuted. 
For instance, Mr. William Whitman, on page 3348, gives the average 
earnings of an American weaver as $9 to $10 (about 36 to 40 marks) 
per week. A third of this would be from 12 to 13i marks. However, 
an ordinary weaver in Germany does not earn on an average less 
than 15 to 18 marks, and often more. The assertion that the Ameri¬ 
can laborer receives three times as much wages as the German is 
therefore at least greatly exaggerated. Two to two and a half times 
as much would be about right, and then the fact is not to be over¬ 
looked that the cost of living in the United States is about twice as 
dear as in Germany, for the very reason of the extremely high pro¬ 
tective-tariff system. 

Schedule M. —Pulp, Paper, and Books. 

LITHOGRAPHS. 

[Pamphlets 11, 35, 43, 45, 47, and 48.] 

-, of Leipzig, hands in the memorial of which 12 

copies are inclosed. For the purpose of being used in the tariff agi¬ 
tation in America, the memorial has also been printed in English and 
sent to America by the union. Two copies of the translation are 
inclosed. The “ Union for customs questions of the paper manufac¬ 
turing industry and the paper trade ” indorses these statements. 

-has also handed in the accompanying wage tables 

prepared by 24 firms engaged especially in exporting to the United 
States. The original copies of the vouchers for all the wage tables, 
signed by the firms in their own handwriting, are also inclosed. An 
English translation of these documents, certified to by the proper 
American consuls, has also been sent to America, likewise with a 
compilation and calculation of the average wages. 


Memorial on the Tariff Hearings of the Committee on Ways and Means 
Referring to Duties on Lithographic Goods. 

The tariff hearings which are at present being held in the United States are, 
as may readily be conceived, being followed with great interest in Germany. 

From the objectiveness and thoroughness with which these “ hearings ” are 
being conducted, and from the large and increasing general export from the 
United States into Germany, it is to be expected that the efforts of those Ameri¬ 
can manufacturers, who endeavor to introduce prohibitive duties, will be without 
success. 

A large proportion of the group of American lithographers has taken up such 
an attitude and has also proposed duties more or less prohibitive of any export 
to America. 

This is quite conceivable, but it must be considered wrong, if these ends are 
sought to be attained by giving false, distorted, or intentionally misleading 
information. 






60 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


It is only against such statements that the following particulars are directed: 

The assertions which are intended to justify the raising of the duties are 
based upon— 

3. The difference in wages and costs of production in both countries. 

2. The alleged increased cost of American production through high duties on 
imported materials used. 

3. The alleged insufficient rate of existing duties. 

4. The increase in the export of lithographic goods to the United States. 

5. The harm done to the American manufacturers through undervaluation. 

It is earnestly intended to treat these questions herewith quite objectively 
and thoroughly. 

I. ASSERTIONS REGARDING DIFFERENCE IN WAGES AND COST OF PRODUCTION IN BOTH 

COUNTRIES. 

As a prefatory remark it may be stated that the whole agitation of those who 
are in favor of prohibitive duties is calculated to mislead, under the pretense of 
protecting national labor. 

Mention is only made of the difference in the amount of actual wages, and 
from this difference a conclusion is drawn as to the comparative cost of produc¬ 
tion of the finished goods in both countries. 

In our age of technic, however, the main work is. and this also refers to the 
printing branch, done by machinery, and in comparison with the cost of ma¬ 
chines. power, lighting, heating, rent, sundries, superintendence, taxes, materials, 
and freight, to which the expenses for original drawings and manuscripts—and 
in Germany the costs for insurance of workmen—must be added, it will be at 
once seen that the actual wages form but a comparatively small proportion of 
the total cost of production. 

It may be important to mention that the taxes in Germany amount to a con¬ 
siderable item, averaging in the principal States 10 to 12 per cent of the net 
profit. A further considerable increase is under consideration. 

The information given by the National Association of Employing Litho¬ 
graphers, regarding the rate of wages usually paid in Germany, is absolutely 
incorrect and misleading. In order to furnish a correct and indisputable 
material, the average wages actualy paid—the correctness of which can be sup¬ 
ported under oath—will be given in form of affidavits by the leading litho¬ 
graphic concerns interested in the export to the United States. 

The affidavits will show that German wages, which still have a tendency to 
rise, are about double as high as stated by the National Association of Employ¬ 
ing Lithographers. 

Mr. Meyercord's contention (Tariff Hearings, No. 11. p. 1039) that wages in 
America are 41 per cent of the total is wrong as far as this percentage is meant 
to represent the average share of the total cost of production. 

Neither Mr. Meyercord nor any other printer is able to give such an average 
figure, as for nearly each individual article the percentage of labor widely 
differs. 

The reproduction of a picture lithographed in the best style and printed in a 
limited edition in a great number of colors will eventually show a much higher 
percentage of labor than 41 per cent, the cost of material being small; while, on 
the other hand, for common work such as labels, run in long editions and in a 
few colors, the percentage of labor is totally different and will be considerably 
less than 41 per cent. The same especially applies to books which are very 
heavy and contain more material and a more or less prevailing type part. 

Resides, the articles are constantly being changed to meet the requirements of 
the market, fashion, and taste of the public, and an average figure can only be 
arrived at for articles manufactured in the past. Such an average figure would 
not be of the slightest value whatever to gain any correct opinion as to the 
question under discussion; on the contrary, it could but mislead. 

The question to be solved is, whether the American lithographers are, under 
the existing conditions, unable to compete with the imported articles. 

This question can only be answered by tangible evidence. 

Such evidence is furnished by the statements made by J. Wolf, jr., Philadel¬ 
phia (Tariff Hearings, No. 11, p. 1057), and other importers, and also by the 
two letters appended from the American Lithographic Company and the Pitts¬ 
burgh Decalcomania Company. More will be said of these statements and letters 
later on. 

As further tangible proofs, samples of the principal articles of export will be 
furnished by the leading German lithographic concerns, in connection with lists 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 61 

Si'ing *lie market price of each individual article, together with the percentage 
ot actual cost of labor thereon. 

By taking the market price, instead of the cost of production, a smaller per¬ 
centage of money paid in wages results than is in fact the case. But this course 
had to be adopted, as it would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible, 
to obtain from the persons concerned the publication of their actual cost of 
production. 

Such lists, the correctness of which can eventually be proved, will be sub¬ 
mitted to the American authorities by the American importers or in some other 
appropriate manner. 

the lists will prove that the total costs of production show no noticeable 
difference between the two countries. As far as such differences do exist for 
certain items, they are more than sufficiently compensated by the greater ef¬ 
fectiveness of the American workmen and the labor-saving machinery and 
methods used in the United States, not to mention the existing high duties. 

It the American lithographers really wish to make an exact comparison, they 
ought to furnish authentic lists similar to those made up by the German lithog¬ 
raphers. 

The information now given regarding the wages paid in America is grouped 
in such a way as to mislead. 

An instance may be seen in the brief of the Association of Employing Lithog¬ 
raphers, in which (no doubt in order to attain a higher average) the wages of 
printers at one, two, and three color rotary presses have been quoted. The 
number of rotary presses for lithographic work is small in comparison to the 
number of flat-bed presses: besides, rotary [tresses are rarely used in Germany, 
for reasons to be mentioned later on; and even with the present duties produc¬ 
tions printed in a few colors on such [tresses can hardly be exported to America. 

Mr. Meyercord makes another misleading and incorrect statement (Tariff 
Hearings, No. 11, p. 1035) by comparing wages for feeders (female labor) in 
Germany with the wages for feeders (male labor) in America, though he knows 
perfectly well that female labor is much less effective and that male feeders 
are used in America also for other work besides feeding the presses. (Tariff 
Hearings, No. 43, p. 6306.) 

If the amount of actual wages paid in both countries be correctly stated, the 
conclusions drawn by the National Association of Employing Lithographers 
become for the most part invalid. 

A decisive proof, however, can only be obtained by comparing the actual work 
performed in Germany and in the United States for the wages paid in each 
country. 

Such an impartial comparison must show the obvious fact that even with 
much lower duties than the existing ones the American printers are still able 
to compete. 

High wages are paid in the whole American industry. The fact, however, that 
this does not exclude the ability to compete is proved by the constant enormous 
increase of the American industry and by the exports of same. 

It is a well-known fact, repeatedly stated even by American protectionists 
at the tariff hearings, that an American workman performs much more than 
a foreign workman. 

Strange to say, Mr. Brasill (Tariff Hearings, No. 11, p. 1148) draws the con¬ 
clusion that the greater effectiveness of the American workman entitles him 
to double the amount of protection. It is just the reverse; a much smaller rate 
of protection is required. 

The high wages in the American industry and the large and continually in¬ 
creasing demand have necessarily resulted in expensive hand work being re¬ 
placed more and more by labor-saving machinery. 

An American lithographic steam press prints 5,000 to 7,000 per day against 
2,500 to 4,000 of the German steam press. 

An American pressman is bound to run two presses when required. In such 
case he receives extra pay of 40 per cent of the minimum scale price of the extra . 
press which he has to run (see Tariff Hearings, No. 43, p. 6306, sec. 3). In 
Germany a pressman runs only one machine. 

If the German steam presses do not show the same working capacity as the 
American presses, the reason must be ascribed to the prevailing conditions. 
Labor is cheaper and there is not sufficient sale for the large editions, as in 
America. 

Roughly speaking, about three-quarters of the German chromolithographic 
productions goes abroad. For this reason and on account of the high duties in 


62 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


foreign countries, tlie necessity arose for the German lithographers to take up 
the manufacture of certain special articles. The export consists principally of 
Christmas, birthday, Easter, valentine, postal, and other cards of every sort 
and style, calendars, picture books, advertising novelties, cigar and other labels, 
decalcomanias, etc. 

There is a constant demand for novelties in these articles, and each year 
large collections are brought put. The great number of new patterns does not 
admit of large editions being printed, and as the chief sale is in fall, there is 
as a rule, no time to print further editions. Moreover, in the case of articles 
like picture books, decalcomanias, labels, etc., the chances of reprints are very 
small, owing to insufficient protection of the foreign designs in the United 
States of America. 

American lithographers and publishers enjoy full protection of their designs 
in Germany, but to the German lithographers and publishers such protection is 
refused in the United States. The best selling designs are copied and sold much 
cheaper than the imported goods. 

The American lithographers are those who spoil the prices on the American 
market by copying foreign designs. A chromolithograph, even of the highest 
technical execution, will not sell unless the design meets the public taste. If 
a design is new and attractive, it will easily fetch a better price. It is mostly 
the importers of chromolithographs who have succeeded in satisfying the de¬ 
mand of the American public for such novelties. 

The necessity of importing these novelties is created in the same manner as the 
import of ceramic decalcomania transfers (see Tariff Hearings, No. 12, p. 1373, 
sec. 4). 

But when an imported new pattern had a big success it was almost sure, 
as already stated, to be copied by American lithographers and thrown on the 
market at low prices. The imitator had no expense for originals, nor any risk 
of keeping less salable patterns on hand. He only copied the best patterns, 
being certain that these would sell. There was only one drawback. He had 
no expense for originals, but no protection, either. Hence it happened that the 
imitators were in their turn imitated and undersold. It has even happened 
that a good pattern has been copied by several lithographers at the same time, 
with the result of very sharp competition. Such improper and unfair procedure 
had a highly injurious effect on the whole market. Prices were gradually de¬ 
pressed, even for goods legitimately produced. 

Therefore the German import can not have injured the American lithograph¬ 
ers; just the contrary may be asserted, and it would be to the advantage of ail 
parties concerned—specially to the American artists—if this unfair state of 
things, created by lack of protection of foreign designs, were changed. 

The fact remains that the American lithographic industry has developed 
enormously under the existing tariff rates, while the import, consisting chiefly 
of specialties, is small in comparison with the American production. On the 
other hand, an increasing export of American lithographic goods is to be 
recorded. 

This export to other countries and also to Germany mainly consists of show¬ 
cards, advertising articles, calendars, cigar labels, etc. 

In Tariff Hearings, No. 11, page 1058, Mr. Wagner showed some samples of 
cigar labels, flaps, etc., made by the American Lithographic Company, stating 
that such goods were sold through their agents in Holland. London, and Ham¬ 
burg at prices which compete with those of German manufacturers. 

The fact of the firm in question having agents abroad, proves that they have 
full confidence in their ability to compete in the open market, without any pro¬ 
tection. 

The statement of the American importers of decalcomanias is of special im¬ 
portance with regard to the question of the American printers’ ability to com¬ 
pete under the existing rates of duty. All these importers have in course of 
time found it advantageous to establish factories in the United States, and they 
are in consequence certainly in favor of duties which give them full protection 
and which would eventually even make it possible for them to gradually cease 
importation. 

Yet the “ committee of importers and manufacturers of decalcomania trans¬ 
fers ” expresses itself not only regarding its interests as printers, but also con¬ 
cerning the interests of the American consumers, among whom the potteries 
stand foremost, as follows: 

“ While we admit the contention that the domestic producer should be pro¬ 
tected as far as possible, the American potters have always looked and are 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


63 


now looking to the importers for their decorations, for the reason of their 
'aiietj and their artistic conception, and being the outcome of the combined 
talents in Europe of artists employed by European decal comania manufacturers 
and the foremost European china factories. The ideas and suggestions offered 
lo these foreign artists have enabled the importers of foreign decal comanias 
to give to American potters the immediate benefit of European talent and art 
for application on their own wares, thus enabling the American potter to enter 
into immediate competition with the imported article.” 

The brief closes as follows: 

“ Therefore in conclusion of the above we respectfully beg to submit our 
argument, resting briefly upon the two facts: First, a printing from a litho¬ 
graphic stone can be nothing but a lithographic print, no matter to what pur¬ 
poses that printing may be applied subsequently to the impressions being taken 
upon some yielding surface; second, these lithographic prints are the most 
important and essential raw material solely used by the American pottery 
manufacturers, and as such should receive a favorable consideration when 
embodied in a new tariff act.” 

Palm, Fechteler & Co., New York, also importers of decalcomanias, and at 
the same time manufacturers of same, express themselves in a similar manner 
about the necessity of protecting the American consumers. They give a list 
of factories of decalcomanias, which have been established in the United States 
within a comparatively short time, and state: 

“ This list of names will show that all these manufacturers have established 
themselves in this country and are growing from year to year under the present 
conditions.” 

The two above-mentioned briefs differ only inasmuch that the firm of Palm, 
Fechteler & Co. is in the main in favor of upholding the present rate of duties 
for decalcomanias, whilst the “committee of importers and manufacturers” 
confesses to having no aversion to a reduction of the tariff. 

The statement of Mr. J. Wolf, jr.. of Philadelphia (Tariff Hearings, No. 11, 
p. 1057-105S) is equally important. 

Mr. Wolf, who is one of the largest producers and importers of lithographic 
goods in America, states, that the American printers turn out work equally as 
good as foreign printers and can yet sell much cheaper. 

In the meantime Mr. Wolf, in connection with a number of other importers, 
has filed a brief to the “ Committee on Ways and Means.” asking for a reduction 
of the present tariff on certain lithographic articles. 

The above three statements have been dealt with at length as coming from 
importers who are at the same time printers, and with whom their interests as 
American printers must prevail. 

As stated by the chairman of the “Committee on Ways and Means,” the in¬ 
terests of the American consumers and importers have not received the least 
consideration from the “National Association of Employing Lithographers” 
(see Tariff Hearings, No. 11, p. 1038, line 28 to end of page). 

As far as importers have defended their endangered interests by means of 
detailed briefs, they confirm what has been said above, at the same time espec¬ 
ially complaining about the imitation of their patterns and the cutting down of 
prices by American printers. 

An importer, Mr. Wagner (see Tariff Hearings, No. 11, p. 1055). has proved 
that the imported cigar labels, flaps, etc., are more expensive than the American 
goods, stating at the same time that he gets no repeat orders, because all his 
good patterns are copied and sold at much lower prices owing to the lack of 
protection. 

As final proof of the capability of the American lithographers to compete, 
special attention is drawn to the two facsimile copies of letters appended to this 
memorial. 

1. Letter of the Pitsburg China Decalcomania Company. 

This firm offers to a pottery in East Liverpool a copied pattern of ceramic 
transfers—which was originally manufactured by E. Nister, Nuremberg, and 
supplied to Messrs. Palm, Fechteler & Co., New York, at 25 cents—for 18 cents— 
that is, roughly 30 per cent cheaper. Regarding the quality the firm writes: 

“ We venture to say that if you fire that sample you will find it equally 
good, if not better, than that which you buy from Palm, Fechteler & Co., for 
which you pay 25 cents.” 

2. Letter of the American Lithographic Company, New York, to E. Nister, 
Nuremberg. In this letter the following sentences are of the greatest importance: 


64 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


“Do you wisli to enlarge your business in this country by catering to that 
much greater number who can not afford to pay the price asked for your 
regular production? If so, let us point out the way. 

“ Many European houses have working agreements with houses here to whom 
they supply transfers on zinc from original drawings on stone; from these 
transfers for printing are made, large editions printed and sold. 

“We feel sure we can be of service to you, making money for you as well as 
for ourselves.” 

In this letter the American Lithographic Company, the largest concern of 
its kind in the United States, offers to a German printing firm the production 
of American editions, which would be considerably cheaper than the same 
editions produced at Nuremberg and exported to America. The American 
Lithographic Company feels certain that both parties would make a good profit 
on such transactions. 

This letter forms a remarkable commentary on and a striking contradiction 
to the statements made by the same company to the Committee on Ways and 
Means, asserting that the American duties now in existence are absolutely 
inadequate. The letter is signed by Mr. Robert M. Donaldson, the same gentle¬ 
man who, among others, signed the brief of the tariff committee of the National 
Association of Employing Lithographers. 

This letter sufficiently characterizes the credibility of the said committee and 
its statements regarding the cost of production in Germany and America. 

The above particulars in their totality absolutely proved that the American 
lithographic industry needs neither a higher duty nor even the present rate of 
duty, and would still be fully able to compete even after a considerable reduc¬ 
tion of the same. 

II. THE ALLEGED INCREASED COST OF AMERICAN PRODUCTION THROUGH HIGH DUTIES 

ON IMPORTED MATERIALS USED. 

The brief of the tariff committee. National Association of Employing Litho¬ 
graphers, points to the disadvantage under which the American manufacturers 
are working, caused through high duties on imported materials such as surface- 
coated paper, colors, bronze powder, metal, leaf, etc. 

If these assertions were really justified, a proposal to abolish or at least 
reduce the respective duties would seem the most reasonable, as done, for 
instance, by the Armour Lithographic Company, Pittsburg (see Tariff Hear¬ 
ings, No. 35, p. 5181). The fact alone that no such proposal is made by the 
National Association of Employing Lithographers proves what the American 
protectionists are driving at. They simply want to do away with all import, 
in order to attain, under the protection of high duties and through syndicates 
or trusts, higher profits at the expense of American consumers. 

The export, which the American industry needs to an ever-increasing extent 
would then be carried on at very low export prices to the injury alike of 
American consumers and foreign industries, but neither the one nor the other 
could endure such an injurious and, in the long run, unbearable state of affairs. 

The statements referring to the American printing industry being burdened 
with duties on materials are, moreover, false and misleading, as they would 
make it appear that the materials in question are on the average increased in 
price by the amount of duties stated. 

The American printing industry employs principally American materials. 
The most important part of the materials used is paper, which is almost ex¬ 
clusively made in the United States in superior quality and, besides, consider¬ 
ably cheaper than the German article. 

Papers which, like decalcomania paper and duplex paper, are partly im¬ 
ported, have also to some extent to be imported into Germany. The import 
of other materials is small as compared with the large production, and therefore, 
affects the same only in a small way. 

Mr. Meyercord’s statement (Tariff Hearings, No. 11, p. 1039) is therefore 
absolutely wrong and intentionally misleading. 

Moreover, and in contradiction to Mr. Meyercord’s statement, that the 
German lithographers are compensated for low export prices by high home 
prices, the fact may be mentioned that, producing principally for export, this is 
by no means the case. On the other hand, they have had to struggle in recent 
times against a considerable rise in prices of materials and labor. 

The materials used by German lithographers, such as duplex paper, book* 
binders’ cloth, silk ribbons, colors, etc., are also partly imported from France 
and England, and a duty of some importance has to be paid on such imports. 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


65 


Mr. Meyercord’s statement (Tariff Hearings, No. 11, p. 1040, line 22) that 
materials may be imported into Germany free of duty, provided the articles 
manufactured therefrom are exported, is also wrong. Such a right is granted 
in the United States, but not in Germany. Permission must be asked from the 
German Government in each individual case, but is, as a rule, refused if the 
German manufacturers of such materials object. Besides there are so many 
formalities to be gone through and so much time is lost that in the lithographic 
branch such permission can hardly be taken advantage of. 

III. ASSERTIONS REGARDING ALLEGED INSUFFICIENT RATE OF EXISTING DUTY. 

The assertions that the existing rates are insufficient are entirely lacking in 
proof. The incorrect statements regarding wages and conditions of production 
in both countries, already referred to, can not be admitted as proof, nor can 
the absolutely incorrect and misleading figures given by Mr. Meyercord be con¬ 
sidered or accepted as such. It is most significant for the position taken up by 
this gentleman that at the hearings he said: 

“ I am a free trader above the 51 per cent basis.” 

The only way to arrive at an indisputable result is by offering tangible 
proofs. Such convincing proofs as to the extent of the existing and proposed 
protection will be furnished by the principal importers submitting samples 
of the leading articles imported within the last few years, together with lists 
showing the actual amount of specific duties paid under the present tariff, and 
to be paid if a new tariff, as proposed, should be introduced. 

Such material is now submitted by the author of this memorial. The 
samples represent a large variety of the leading imported articles. Of these 
but a few can be imported at a lower rate than 25 per cent because the specific 
duty charges the expensive articles less than the lower priced ones, which 
are the goods mostly imported. The duty on the bulk of the goods exceeds 
25 per cent and runs up to 63 per cent of the actual market value, not to men¬ 
tion the considerable expense for freight and clearing. 

This proves that even the existing duties are mostly too high and should be 
reduced. Such a reduction is urgently needed on children’s toy books and 
booklets under 24 ounces (position 400). In fact the whole existing tariff 
could bear a considerable reduction without injuring the American industry. 

A new tariff, as proposed, would mean an average increase of the duties to 
more than three times the present amount. The duties would range in the main 
from 50 to 237 per cent of the market value. This clearly shows that the 
intention of the American lithographers is to annihilate importation. 

In connection with the question of duties, it seems of special importance to 
draw attention again to the injustice done to the importers of lithographic 
goods through their designs being copied in America. 

In many cases the expenses for originals or manuscripts are very high. 
These expenses are included in the market price and duty is charged thereon. 
If, for instance, the market price for an article is $1 and the originals and 
designs are included in this price at 25 cents, the unprotected originals (taking 
an average duty of 35 per cent) are charged about cents duty. 

This is extremely unjust, as duties should be levied only on values which 
are acknowledged and protected as such in the United States. In consideration 
of these circumstances, the duties on imported goods are in reality very consid¬ 
erably higher than the tariff shows, and in the instance above given would 
figure out at about 50 per cent instead of 35 per cent. 

Further, a most important point must be mentioned. 

The actual protection of the American industry in general is increased far 
beyond the actual amount of duties, freight, clearing expenses, etc., by the fact 
that the importer is bound to add an appropriate profit to compensate himself 
not only on these large outlays, but also on his considerable risks through un¬ 
saleable goods and bad debts. 

Mr. Meyercord, who certainly is no friend of the importers, backed up this 
statement by giving the figures of import as about $7,000,000, including sta¬ 
tionery, adding (Tariff Hearings, No. 11, p. 1037) : “after duty is paid and the 
cost of marketing, which is very large, makes it run up to $11,000,000 to 
$12,000,000.” This means a protection of from 60 to 70 per cent. 

Mr. Meyercord is to be thanked for the above important statement. 

The great difference between the American market value and the market 
value of import as figured by Mr. Meyercord clearly shows to what extent 
the American lithographers are protected under the present tariff. 


4731—S. Doc. 68, 61-1, pt 2-5 



66 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


By this assertion Mr. Meyercord flatly contradicts another statement of his 
(Tariff Hearings, No. 11, p. 1040), that the American manufacturer receives 
only about 19 per cent protection. The above figures of Mr. Meyercord show a 
protection more than three times as great. 

It is also of consequence to say a few words regarding the history of import 
duties on lithographic goods in the United States. 

Prior to the McKinley Act the lithographic goods were imported as “ printed 
matter” with a duty of 25 per cent. The McKinley bill separated the litho¬ 
graphic products and assessed a duty of 35 per cent ad valorem. Yet the 
American manufacturers were continually complaining of certain importers not 
paying sufficient duty through undervaluation. 

When the Wilson bill came up for discussion, there was a long and bitter 
struggle concerning the lithographic schedule. Finally, Chairman Jones, at 
the request of Senator Gorman, notified both the importers and the American 
manufacturers that they must come together and harmonize on an equitable 
rate of duty, fair to the principal interests on both sides. The Wilson-Gorman 
tariff was the result, and the principal parties on both sides signed an agree¬ 
ment in Washington, and their suggested schedule—with certain modifications— 
was finally passed by Congress. 

When the Dingley tariff came up for discussion, the more prominent Amer¬ 
ican manufacturers and importers had a conference in New York and agreed, 
after considerable discussion, to request Mr. Dingley and the “ Ways and 
Means Committee ” to incorporate the Wilson tariff practically as it stood in the 
new Dingley tariff. This was done with some modifications. 

Later, however, there was great dissatisfaction, and the schedule was made 
and remade a number of times. 

After a good deal of bad feeling, and bitterness, and fighting on both sides, 
the leading American manufacturers and importers met at Washington and 
signed an agreement to accept the present schedule—paragraphs 398 and 400— 
as practically satisfactory to the interests concerned. 

The American lithographers had very strong influence, and practically had 
everything that Congress could possibly feel was just, given them in the Mc¬ 
Kinley, the Wilson, and the Dingley bills. 

The agreement made and signed for the Dingley tariff is reported to be still 
in existence in the hands of the Treasury Department in Washington, or at the 
appraisers’ stores in New York. 

This shows that the present schedule is the result of many years’ work, dis¬ 
sension, and discussion by all parties concerned. 

IV. ASSERTIONS REGARDING THE INCREASE IN THE IMPORT OF LITHOGRAPHIC GOODS 

TO THE UNITED STATES. 

The statements of the “ National Association of Employing Lithographers ” 
regarding the increase of import are quite as incorrect and misleading as those 
about wages, cost of material, etc. 

In the brief of the “ National Association of Employing Lithographers ” the 
import is given as follows: 


1899- $799,475 

1907 - 3, 968, 542 

1908 - 4, 911,102 


At the tariff hearings, Mr. Meyercord, of Chicago, gave the figure of imports 
in 1908 as $7,000,000, and at another time as $11,000,000 to $12,000,000. He 
was obliged to confess that in the amount of $7,000,000 he had included the 
import of paper goods (other than lithographic goods), and that the amount 
of $11,000,000 to $12,000,000 was obtained by taking the American market 
price. 

Mr. Meyercord also brought into comparison with his deceptive statements 
regarding the amount of imports, the decrease of the American production 
during the crisis in 1908 by 30 per cent, that is to say, $25,000,000, whilst the 
import in 1908 had considerably increased in spite of the crisis. 

This means another attempt at deception by a system of wrongly grouped 
figures, in which the amounts of imports for the years 1900 to 1906 are con¬ 
spicuous by their absence. 

The under-mentioned amounts of all imports from 1899 to 1908 confirm this 
supposition: 





WAGES IN GERMANY. 67 

Imports of lithographic goods into the United States as per American statistics. 


Year. 

Total 

import. 

Import 

from 

Germany. 

1899 . 

$799, 475 
905,609 
947,631 
1,052,966 
1,249,733 
1,451,491 
1,506,723 
2,205,921 
3,968,542 
4,911,102 


1900 . 


1901. 


1902 . 


1903. 

$837,690 

1904 . 

1905. 


1906 . 

1,913,402 

3,497,795 

1907 . 

1908 . 




The share of the imports coming from Germany could not be ascertained for 
the whole period, and the figures are to be completed. 

At all events, the above figures show that a constant and abnormal increase 
in the import of lithographic goods, as represented by Mr. Meyercord, is 
imaginary. 

Considering the enormous development of the United States within the above- 
mentioned period, a large increase of imports would only be natural. Yet 
the figures up to 1906 show rather a decrease, as the imports have only grown, 
owing to new articles having been added, which, like ceramic decalcomanias, 
were indispensable for the development of the American potteries, or, like 
postal cards, met a sudden craze, which could not be satisfied by the American 
lithographers and is now on the decline. 

A large increase of imports is only shown for the two years 1907 and 1908. 
This increase can only be attributed to the enormous craze for postal cards. 
The popularity of this article is on the wane, and, accordingly, the imports will 
soon show a drop. 

In the brief handed to the Committee on Ways and Means by Mr. Wick¬ 
ham Smith on behalf of the leading importers, the import of postal cards is 
mentioned as having been $3,000,000 within a year, while Mr. Otto Palm 
(Tariff Hearings, No. 11, p. 1048) gives the imports of decalcomanias as being 
about $400,000. 

If these amounts are deducted, the importation of regular goods shows only 
a figure of about $1,500,000, as against $799,475 in 1899. 

This is certainly not alarming, as Mr. Meyercord, whose figures are grouped 
in favor of the American lithographers, mentions the American exports of litho¬ 
graphic articles as scarcely exceeding $1,000,000 a year.” (Tariff Hearings, 
No. 11, p. 1037.) 

Mr. Meyercord has evidently found out since that the above figures may be 
used against him, and gives in Tariff Hearings, No. 43, page 6308, the export 
figure as being considerably less. He confessed, however, that he had no exact 
figures. 

So far as the imports are concerned the official figures for the years 1899 to 
1908 will have to be examined as to how much of the values given fall under the 
same position for lithographic goods as the importations in 1899. 

The proposals of the National Association of Employing Lithographers for 
increase of duties refer only to lithographic articles. In making a comparison 
we therefore have only to deal with this part of the imports and further im¬ 
portant amounts may have to be deducted from the figures quoted above. 

It will be easy to get the correct figures from the American authorities. 

The statement that the import in 1908 has considerably increased in spite of 
the crisis is also misleading. The American fiscal year 1908 runs from July 1, 
1907, to the end of June, 190S, and official figures of import for 1908 are there¬ 
fore affected by orders which were given before the crisis. 

The German lithographic industry suffered at least as much from the crisis as 
the American did; and the German production was in 1908 in an appalling state 
of depression. Moreover, large amounts of money were lost by German lithog¬ 
raphers, owing to American importers (especially of postal cards) not being 
able to meet their obligations. 

In addition to the crisis, the large and growing development of three-color 
block printing has for a number of years past brought about a falling off in the 
lithographic branch all over the world. Much work which was formerly done 




























68 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


exclusively by lithography is now done by that process, and this development is 
sure to increase still more. 

Finally, it remains to be said that the statements regarding the amount ot 
the American production, as given by Mr. Meyercord, leave much room for 
doubt. It is quite impossible to ascertain with exactness the amount of pro¬ 
duction, and the estimated figure of $25,000,000 seems to be the result of a valu¬ 
ation just as arbitrary and deceptive as the other statements of Mr. Meyercord. 

The positive fact remains that Mr. Meyercord’s statement (Tariff Hearings, 
No. 11, p. 1042) : “ In twelve years American lithography has advanced pos¬ 
sibly 20 per cent and the imported products 1,000 per cent in the same time,” is 
absolutely untrue. 

V. ALLEGED HARM DONE TO AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS THROUGH UNDERVALUATION. 

Incorrect declarations can hardly be prevented and will certainly occur if 
duties are high. This should be no reason for increasing the duties. 

In the lithographic trade the determination of the real value of an article 
is very difficult, in fact, nearly impossible. The cost of originals and plates is 
an important part of the cost of production, and the value of an original paint¬ 
ing especially may be very high, according to the artist’s standing. These pri¬ 
mary costs are then spread over the entire edition, and, according to the quan¬ 
tity printed, enormous differences in the price may arise. If, for instance, 
originals and plates for a particular work cost $500, the share per copy of an 
edition of 1,000 copies would be 50 cents, while for an edition of 50,000 this 
share would drop down to 1 cent per copy. This fact may have led to many 
difficulties with the customs, without there being any incorrect procedure on 
the part of the importers. 

For these reasons the importers are as far as possible in favor of specific 
duties, which make incorrect valuation impossible. 

As far as goods assessed ad valorem are concerned, the large majority of 
importers no doubt declare correctly. 

The author of the above statements has been since 18S6 interested to a con¬ 
siderable degree in the export to the United States. During this great number 
of years he has never experienced even the slightest difficulties with the Amer¬ 
ican customs. 


Pittsburg, Pa., September 9, 1904 • 

Knowles, Taylor & Knowles, 

East Liverpool, Ohio. 

Gentlemen : We are in receipt of your letter of September 7. We are also 
surprised, as well as yourselves, at the tone of your letter. We first desire to 
remind you of a fact that no doubt is well known, that the practice of copying 
is universal, not only with the decalcomania people but with the potters as well. 
We do not deny that we copied this pattern, and we sent it to you for the 
purpose of informing you that we had copied it; and the reason why we did 
copy it was because your purchase is from foreign manufacturers, and foreign 
manufacturers as a whole, without any exceptions, are making a strenuous effort 
to drive American manufacturers out of the market. You will no doubt recall 
that before decalcomania was successfully made in America that you paid a 
great deal more money for designs than you do now, and the foreign makers 
even go so far now as to cut their old prices in two, with the deliberate intent 
to drive out the American trade, and then, of course, you would be held up 
again for high rates. Isn’t it true, gentlemen, that American potters like to 
keep out foreign trade in the manufacture of china ware The same principle 
holds good with all other manufacturers. 

With regard to the character of the goods, we will give you the benefit of 
forming your conclusions without a fired test and possibly hasty decision. 
We venture to say that if you fire that sample you will find it equally as good, 
if not better, than that which you buy from Palm Fletcher for which you pay 
25 cents. We offer it to you for 18 cents, and yet it seems, because we are trying 
to benefit you, that you enter into a spirit of abuse; this is certainly very un¬ 
grateful. We desire to say that we are in a position to make just as good 
goods as is made any place, and our experience in the trade proves that fact; 
that within the last year or two we have perfected the manufacture to such 
an extent that even the foreigners admit that we are strong competitors. 



WAGES IN GERMANY. 


69 


There is one paragraph that I would like you to examine. Kindly advise us 
wherein we are not doing a legitimate business. Did you ever hear of us in 
any connection doing anything but a legitimate business? If you call copying 
a pattern illegitimate, that is so common, not only at home but abroad, that 
it certainly ought not to be taken into consideration; in fact, we kept out of the 
copying business for several years, until we found it was so universal that we 
had to adopt it as well as others. We write this in a spirit of friendship and 
fairness, and trust you will consider it in the same light. 

Yours, very truly, 

Pittsburg China Decalcomania Company. 

R. F. Blair. 


Sales Department American Lithographic Company, 

Nineteenth Street and Fourth Avenue, 

New York, November 1, 190 j /. 

Dear Sir : We note that the sale of your picture books in this country is 
through Messrs. E. P. Dutton & Co., a most responsible and reliable house, 
who deal in high-class productions only; therefore of necessity the sale is 
limited. 

Do you wish to enlarge your business in this country by catering to that 
much greater number who can not afford to pay the price asked for your regu¬ 
lar productions? If so, let us point the way. 

Many European publishing houses have working agreements with houses 
here to whom they supply transfers on zinc from original drawings on stone. 
From these, transfers for printing are made and large editions printed and 
sold. If your agreement with the Messrs. Dutton permit you to entertain this 
proposition on current or new publications, we could print editions de luxe for 
the Messrs. Dutton, while at the same time we could print large editions for a 
distributing house wdiose trade would in no wise conflict with that of Messrs. 
Dutton. 

Should your agreement with Messrs. Dutton prevent your doing anything 
with us on current or new publications, you must have a very large number of 
drawings on stone of old publications which could be utilized. 

We feel sure that we can be of service to you, making money for you as 
well as ourselves, and will be glad to hear from you at your earliest conven¬ 
ience, for if there is anything to be done during the next year samples would 
have to be out early in the year. 

Sincerely, yours, American Lithographic Company, 

By Robert M. Donaldson, Vice-President. 


Supplement to the Memorial on Tariff Hearings before the Committee on 
Ways and Means regarding Duty on Lithographic Productions. 

No. 45 of the Tariff Hearings contains, on pages 6590 to 6598, briefs of 
the Detroit Publishing Company and of the Rose Company, Philadelphia, 
asking for an increase of duty on post and greeting cards. These briefs can 
not remain uncontradicted. 

Besides those assertions regarding difference of wages and prices of materials 
already made by other parties, and which the memorial has proved to be incor¬ 
rect, the following assertions are made in justification of the proposed increase 
of duty: 

1. That the business in post cards was developed at great expense by American 
lithographers, but later, after commencing to gain importance, was taken out 
of their hands through the import of foreign goods. 

2. That the original designs cost four to five times as much in the United 
States as abroad. 

3. That the expenses and formalities of copyright, to protect designs against 
stealing, are saved by the foreign lithographers. 

4. That the American lithographers have only a home market, and can there¬ 
fore only print smaller, and consequently more expensive, editions. 

5. That the foreign lithographers steal the designs of the American lithog¬ 
raphers—as proved by five samples submitted—owing to the existing laws in 
foreign countries not affording sufficient protection. 

It is difficult to confine oneself to the use of parliamentary expressions in 
repulsing the above five assertions, and one is compelled to declare that they 
are gross falsehoods. 




70 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Tlie pictorial post card was invented in Europe and extensively used there 
many years before Americans took up this article, the importers being the first 
to develop it. Pictorial post cards became a fashion, and as the American litho¬ 
graphers were unable to meet the enormous demand for novelties the import of 
this article increased rapidly. 

At the same time, however, the American lithographers by no means lost 
through this import. They took part in the manufacture of the new article, 
and as it did not compete with any existing article an increased return was the 
result. 

The alleged higher costs of American originals can by no means have hindered 
the development of the manufacture of post cards in the United States, as an 
experience of many years proves that originals are cheaper in the United States 
than in Europe. 

If the American lithographers had shown greater activity in supplying the 
market with novel and attractive designs (the production of which is an abso¬ 
lute necessity for such an article), their share of this business might have been 
much larger. 

Unfortunately, most of the American lithographers have taken advantage of 
the fact that foreign designs are unprotected in the United States, and, instead 
of creating their own patterns, have copied foreign designs, thereby also 
injuring the interests both of the American artists and the American market. 

The injustice done to the foreign lithographers through this proceeding, and 
the injurious consequences created by this state of affairs, even for the legiti¬ 
mate American trade, are exhaustively treated in the memorial (p. 4, secs. 7-15, 
and p. 9, secs. 3-5). 

If the formalities necessary for the protection of copyrights do molest the 
American lithographers, the only correct remedy would be a proposal to change 
the American copyright laws and to join the “ Berne convention.” 

Moreover, the foreign lithographers would gladly bear the expenses of the 
said American formalities, if they could only obtain protection of their designs 
in the United States. Such protection, however, is denied to the foreign lithog¬ 
rapher, whilst, on the other hand, the American lithographers enjoy full pro¬ 
tection of their designs abroad, and especially in Germany, without any expense 
or formalities at all. 

As regards the alleged imitation of five designs, the owner of these has the 
right to proceed legally against the imitator, and will have the German copy¬ 
right law, which has even been extended since 1907, on his side. On the other 
hand, many thousands of German designs, imitated in the United States with 
impunity, can be submitted, the American laws affording no protection against 
such piracies. 

If the American lithographers copy foreign designs they must, as a matter 
of course, restrict the sale of these to their home market. 

The small number of American lithographers who publish their own designs 
are doing a good and remunerative business all over the world, which fact is 
proved by the adjoined 33 samples of postal cards bought in German and English 
retail stores: 

Patterns 1-6 .—Copyright by Campbell Art Company; published by Iteinthal & 
Newman. 

Patterns 7-16 .—Copyright by Charles Scribner’s Sons; published by Reiuthal 
& Newman. 

Patterns 17-21 .—Copyright by Archie Gunn; published by Taylor, Platt & Co. 

Patterns 22 33 .—Copyright by Philip Boileau; . published by Reiuthal & 
Newman. 

Besides, attention must be drawn to the fact that the above-mentioned false¬ 
hoods are in contradiction with other assertions contained in the two briefs. 
The whole arguments in favor of an increase of duty are based upon the asser¬ 
tion that the American lithographers would be able to produce the same articles 
in the same good quality as the foreign manufacturers if the low prices of the 
imported goods did not hinder the development of the American production. A 
direct contradiction to this will be found in Tariff Hearings No. 45, page 
6597, section 8, which says that the American Government would not be a loser 
through an increase of duty, because, irrespective of price, the import of good 
and attractive designs would still be continued. 

It is a fact that pictorial post cards can not be considered as articles of 
necessity, and only find a market through being novel and attractive. It is by 
no means the cheapness alone that influences the sale, and as the proposers of 
higher duties assert their ability to compete in quality with the foreign manu¬ 
facturers, whilst—as already pointed out in the memorial—the American lithog- 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 71 

rapliers are constantly proving their ability to compete in price by undersell¬ 
ing the importers, all grounds for their complaints become invalid. 

If the American lithographers would confine themselves to the production 
of original and attractive designs, which they could easily do by acquiring suit¬ 
able originals, even abroad, they could do a much larger trade. 

Instead of this, all the endeavors of the American protectionists point to 
their intention of continuing the copying of foreign samples and annihilating 
importation, thereby making higher profits at the expense of the consumers. 
r Ihe realization of these endeavors could hardly mean a permanent advantage 
to the American lithographers, for the quickly growing competition and the 
establishing of branch houses of foreign lithographic concerns would soon put 
an end to such a state of affairs. 


Statement oj the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Leipzig. 


Occupation. 

N umber 
of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 


Marks. 

Marks. 

Marks. 


Marks. 

Transferrers and pantographers. 







Pressmen. 

5 

37 

{ i 

178.79 

1,274.81 

44.12 

30.05 

2.67 

17.82 

.82 

.53 

181.46 

1,292.63 

44.94 
30.58 

54 

48 

54 

54 

36.30 

34.95 

22. 47 
30.58 

Lithographers. 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

(6) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 
sinkers . 







Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-readv section... 















(Signature.) 

Leipzig, January 15,1909. 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Nuremberg. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional w r orkers: 

Master machinists. 

13 

Marks. 
512. 85 

Marks. 

11.30 

Marks. 
524.15 

9 

Marks. 
40. 32 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

18 

534. 90 

12.40 

547. 30 

9 

30.40 

Pressmen. 

6 

204.18 

4. 74 

208. 92 

9 

34.82 

Lithographers. 

14 

442.44 

10.05 

452.49 

8 

32.32 

II. Assistants: 

(ff) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cutters, 
machine tenders, etc. 

12 

293. 49 

7.54 

301.03 

9 

25.08 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc . 



(&) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 

sinkers. 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all 
workers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section. 

25 

71 

288.40 

656.11 

8.59 

20. 49 

296. 99 

676. 60 

9 

9 

11.88 

9. 53 







Nuremberg, January 19, 1909. 


(Signature.) 




























































72 


WAGES IN GERMANY 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Reinicken- 

dorf-Ost. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

18 

Marks. 
924.50 

Marks. 

8.13 

Marks. 
932.63 

54 

Marks. 

51.81 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

23 

734.24 

13.11 

747.35 

54 

32. .50 

Pressmen. 

16 

494. 00 

9.12 

503.12 

54 

31.44 

Lithographers. 

56 

1,981.86 

26.85 

2,008.71 

48 

35.87 

Printers. 

2 

57.72 

1.14 

58.86 

54 

29. 43 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

50 

1,597.96 

28.21 

1,626.17 

54 

k 

32. 52 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

24 

648.44 

14.39 

662.83 

54 

27.61 

(6) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 
sinkers . 

109 

1,863.65 

42.25 

1,905.90 

54 

17.48 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section.!. 

73 

1,028.64 

27.75 

1,056.39 

54 

14.47 


January 20,1909. 


(Signature.) 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Nuremberg. 


Occupation. 

Number 

° f 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

15 

Marks. 
505. 68 

Marks. 

10.03 

Marks. 
515. 71 

54 

Marks. 

36.85 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

13 

407. 44 

8. 44 

415. 88 

54 

34.65 

Pressmen. 

4 

119. 60 

2. 72 

122. 32 

54 

30.60 

Lithographers. 

28 

878.11 

18. 77 

896. 88 

48 

33. 20 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cutters, 
machine tenders, etc. 

13 

309. 20 

8.35 

317. 55 

54 

24.40 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers,color mixers,stokers, etc. 

3 

75. 72 

1.95 

77. 67 

54 

25. 90 

(6) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

24 

301. 39 

9.48 

310. 87 

54 

12. 95 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section.'. 

81 

822. 63 

27. 61 

850. 24 

54 

10. 50 


(Signature.) 


Nuremberg, January 21, 1909. 






























































WAGES IN GERMANY 


73 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Crefeld. 





Contri- 





Number 




Average 

Occupation. 

Total 

butions 

Total 

Hours 

wages 

of 

pay per 

for la- 

expend i- 

of work 

per 


workers. 

week. 

borer in- 

tures. 

per week. 

laborer 




surance. 


per week 

I. Professional workers: 


Marks. 

Marks. 

Marks. 


Marks. 

9/1 AZ. 

Master machinists. 

11 

10 

1 

372.60 

306.10 

30.90 

415.82 

6.38 

5.80 

.58 

5.80 

378.98 

311.90 

31.50 

421.62 

52* 

52* 

52* 

461 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

31.20 

91 KA 

Pressmen.!.T..t . 

Lithographers. 

10 

dl . dU 
AO 1 A 

II. Assistants: 

2Z. 10 

(a) Male— 







Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 







stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

11 

330.20 

6.38 

336.58 

55* 

30.60 

Unskilled help, such as package 

carriers, color mixers, stokers, 







etc. 

(6) Female— 

17 

474.80 

9.86 

484.66 

55* 

28.50 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 







stampers, sprinklers, and die 

sinkers. 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 

28 

380.00 

9.52 

389.50 

551 

13.90 

catchers, assorters, and all work- 







ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section. 

90 

900.00 

27.00 

927.00 

55* 

10.30 


Crefeld, January 21, 1909. 


(Signature.) 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Leipzig. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours of 
work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 


Marks. 

Marks. 

Marks. 


Marks. 

Master machinists. 

10 

387.75 

6. 20 

393.95 


39 40 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

11 

540.07 

6.82 

546.89 


49.72 

Pressmen. 

18 

542 58 

10.87 

553 45 


30 75 

Lithographers. 

11 

374 52 

6.79 

381.31 


34.66 

II. Assistants: 




(a) Male— 







Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 







stampers, polishers, label cut- 







ters, machine tenders, etc. 

1 

31.20 

.62 

31.82 


31.82 

Unskilled help, such as package 






carriers, color mixers, stokers. etc. 

6 

99.84 

2.51 

102.35 


17.06 

( b ) Female— 







Skilled help, such as feeders, 







stampers, sprinklers, and die 







sinkers. 

23 

241.28 

7. 85 

249.13 


10.83 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 






catchers, assorters, and all work- 







ers in the bookbinderv and 







make-readv section. 

4 

43.68 

1.40 

45.08 


11.27 


Leipzig, January 22,1909. 


(Signature.) 



































































74 WAGES IN GEE MANY. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Dresden 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours of 
work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

IS 

Marks. 
605.65 

Marks. 

12.41 

Marks. 

618.06 

53§ 

Marks. 

34.33 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

21 

628.75 

13.68 

642.43 

531 

30.59 

Pressmen. 

2 

63.20 

1.36 

64.56 

533 

32.28 

Lithographers. 

18 

582.63 

11.44 

594.07 

48 

33.00 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

34 

803.05 

18.68 

821.73 

533 

24.17 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, etc. 

18 

356.72 

8.58 

365.30 

533 

20.30 

( b ) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

29 

368.16 

9.51 

377.67 

533 

13.02 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section. 

85 

788.32 

22.08 

809. 40 

533 

9.52 


Dresden, January 18, 1909. 


(Signature.) 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Dresden. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours of 
work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

8 

Marks. 
302.31 

Marks. 

5. 64 

Marks. 
307.95 

51 

Marks. 

38.50 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

12 

405.33 

8.21 

413.54 

51 

34.46 

Pressmen. 

5 

142.02 

3.16 

145.18 

51 

29.00 

Lithographers. 

49 

1,831. 40 

32.32 

1,863.72 

48 

38.00 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male- 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

» 

13 

350. 40 

7. 45 

357.85 

51 

27.50 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc..... 

4 

79.90 

1.90 

81.80 

51 

20. 45 

(b) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

10 

125. 43 

3.20 

128. 63 

51 

12.86 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all 
workers in the bookbindery 
and make-ready section... 

16 

176.70 

4. 60 

181. 30 

51 

11.35 


(Signature.) 











































WAGES IN GERMANY. 


75 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees, exclusive of 
apprentices and youthful workers, at Leipzig. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
weelc. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

12 

Marks. 
396.78 

Marks. 

8.61 

Marks. 
405.39 

54 

Marks. 
33.78 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

11 

344.78 

7.59 

352.37 

54 

32.03 

Pressmen. 

2 

61.36 

1.41 

62.77 

54 

31.39 

Lithographers. 

4 

122.22 

2.68 

124.90 

48 

31.23 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male- 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

10 

283.40 

6.63 

290.03 

54 

29.00 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, etc. 

5 

108.16 

2.76 

110.92 

54 

22.18 

. ( 6 ) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

29 

387.96 

9.96 

397.92 

54 

13.72 

Unskilled help, such as sheet catch¬ 
ers, assorters, and all workers in 
the bookbindery and make- 
ready section. 

51 

525.13 

15.45 

540.58 

54 

10.60 


(Signature.)- 

Leipzig, January 16,1909. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Leipzig. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per day. 

m 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

30 

Marks. 

1,189.55 

Marks. 

32.40 

Marks. 

1,221.95 

83 

Marks. 

40.75 

Transferrers. 

44 

1,407.18 

47. 52 

1,454. 70 

4 

33. 06 

Photographers and pantographers. 

41 

1,484.18 

44.28 

1,528.46 

8 

37. 28 

Lithographers. 

46 

1,800.45 

49.68 

1,850.13 

8 

40. 22 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

15 

417.36 

9.15 

426. 51 

9 

28. 43* 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

14 

310. 30 

7.00 

317. 30 

9 

22.66 

( 6 ) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

38 

498.60 

12.92 

511. 52 

9 

13.46 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section. 

73 

714. 75 

21.17 

735. 92 

9 

10.08 


(Signature.) 
































































76 WAGES IN GERMANY. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Rheydt. 


Occupation. 

Number 
. of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 


Marks. 

Marks. 

Marks. 


Marks. 

Master machinists. 

37 

1,115 

26 

1,141 

54 

30.83 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

30 

918 

23 

941 

54 

31.36 

Press starters. 

5 

156 

5 

161 

54 

32.20 

Lithographers. 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male- 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut- 

48 

1,553 

40 

1,653 

48 

34. 43 

ters, machine tenders, etc. 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 

99 

2,296 

58 

2,354 

55 

23.77 

etc. 

(6) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 

117 

1,832 

45 

1,877 

55 

16.00 

sinkers. 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 

76 

1,030 

26 

1,006 

55 

13.90 

make-ready section. 

44 

505 

12 

517 

55 

11.75 


(Signature.)- 

January 22,1909. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the ivhole staff of employees at Berlin. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

8 

Marks. 
328.50 

Marks. 

4.64 

Marks. 
333.14 

54 

Marks. 

41.64 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

7 

200.00 

4. 06 

204.06 

54 

29.14 

Pressmen. 

2 

67.50 

1.11 

68.61 

54 

34.31 

Lithographers. 

35 

1,250.20 

20. 30 

1,270.50 

48 

36.30 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

14 

377.22 

6 . 72 

383. 94 

54 

27.42 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

12 

225.00 

5. 76 

230. 76 

54 

19.23 

(5) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

81 

1,350. 85 

29.16 

1,380. 01 

54 

17.03 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section. 

49 

616. 77 

17.64 

634. 41 


12. 94 


Berlin, January 18,1909. 


(Signature.) 

















































WAGES IN GERMANY. 77 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Leipzig. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

11 

Marks. 

467.68 

Marks. 
12.13 

Marks. 
479.81 

50! 

Marks. 

43.62 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

7 

278.95 

8.71 

287.66 

50! 

41.10 

Pressmen. 

I 2 

57.18 

1.83 

59.01 

50! 

29.50 

1 8 

510.34 

8.43 

518.77 

47 £ 

64.84 

Lithographers. 

19 

714.05 

19.86 

733.91 

47J 

38.63 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

5 

149.98 

4. 72 

154.70 

50! 

30.94 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

3 

73.18 

2.37 

75.55 

50 2 

25.18 

( b ) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

13 

163.56 

5.77 

169.33 

50t 

13.02 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section. 

11 

113.22 

4.56 

117.78 

_ 

50-2 

10.70 


Leipzig, January 22, 1909. 


(Signature.) 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Nuremberg. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

12 

Marks. 

490.65 

Marks. 

8.52 

Marks. 
499.17 

53| 

Marks. 

41.60 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

13 

410.30 

8.53 

419.13 

53! 

32.25 

Pressmen. 

4 

124.84 

2.71 

127.55 

53! 

30.90 

Lithographers. 

19 

700.48 

12.17 

712.65 

48 

37.50 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

10 

239.12 

6.08 

245.20 

53! 

24.50 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

8 

136. 61 

3.77 

140.38 

53! 

17.55 

(6) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

20 

228.70 

6.87 

235.57 

53! 

.75 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and make- 
ready section. 

71 

671.67 

21.58 

693.25 

53! 

9.75 


Nuremberg, January 16, 1909. 


(Signature.) 




















































78 WAGES IN GERMANY. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Nuremberg. 


Occupation. 

Number Total 
of pay per 

workers, week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

Marks. 
22 ; 877.77 

Marks. 

12.82 

Marks. 
890. 59 

54 

Marks. 

40.48 

Transferrers and pantovraphers. 

32 972.38 

19.84 

992.22 

54 

31.01 

Pressmen. 

15 | 467.15 

8.77 

475. 92 

54 

31.73 

Lithographers. 

53 ! 2,080.53 

30.18 

2,110.71 

48 

39.82 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male- 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters machine tenders, etc. 

41 1,163. 46 

24. 94 

1,188. 40 

54 

29.00 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc . 

• 

21 442.66 

12.93 

455. 59 

54 

21.70 

(5) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

41 488.87 

17.22 

506. 09 

54 

12.34 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all 
workers in the bookbindery 
and make-ready section. 

153 1,447.87 

55. 28 

1,503.15 

54 

9 82 





Nuremberg, January 19,1909. 


(Signature.) 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

15 

Marks. 
494.55 

Marks. 

10.60 

Marks. 
505.15 

54 

Marks. 
33.70 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

14 

396.79 

9.57 

406. 36 

54 

29.00 

Pressmen. 

10 

253.84 

6.05 

259.89 

54 

26.00 

Lithographers. 

25 

906.00 

17.10 

923.10 

48 

36.90 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male- 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

16 

435. 92 

11.27 

447.19 

54 

27.95 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers,etc. 

9 

198. 00 

5.26 

203. 26 

54 

22.60 

(6) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 
sinkers. 

35 

482. 00 

13. 75 

495. 75 

54 

14.15 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all 
workers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section. 

26 

290. 00 

8.82 

298. 82 

54 

11.50 


January 21,1909. 


(Signature.) 


















































WAGES IN GERMANY. 79 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Detmold. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week:. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

32 

Marks. 

1,215.89 

Marks. 
17.27 

Marks. 
1,233.16 

81 

Marks. 
38.54 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

34 

995.30 

17.36 

1 ,012.66 

81 

29.78 

Pressmen. 

6 

189.27 

7.21 

196.48 

81 

32.75 

Lithographers. 

20 

650. 55 

9.69 

660.24 

8 

33.01 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

33 

953.63 

16.15 

969. 78 

81 

29.39 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

41 

7S9.83 

14.87 

804. 70 

81 

19.63 

(6) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 
sinkers . 

61 

869. 80 

19.54 

889.34 

81 

14. 58 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section... 

89 

1,064.39 

25. 44 

• 

1,089.83 

81 

12.25 


(Signature.)- 

Detmold, January 26, 1909. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Berlin. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists... 

8 

Marks. 

407.60 

Marks. 

4.64 

Marks. 

412.24 

54 

Marks. 

51.53 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

9 

311.80 

5.22 

317.02 

54 

35.22 

Pressmen. 

3 

119.30 

1.94 

121.24 

54 

40.41 

Lithographers. 

44 

1,864.15 

25.28 

1,889.43 

54 

42.95 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

27 

1,020.18 

14.85 

1,035.03 

54 

38.24 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

13 

288.14 

6.33 

294. 47 

54 

22.65 

(6) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers. 

42 

819.14 

15.32 

834. 46 

54 

19.90 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section. 

87 

1,382.43 

21.18 

1,403.61 

54 

16.13 


Berlin, January 20, 1909. 


(Signature.) 

























































80 WAGES IN GERMANY. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of trained employees at Leipzig. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

20 

Marks. 
723.22 

Marks. 

15.91 

Marks. 
739.13 

53| 

Marks. 

36.96 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

28 

925.98 

20.37 

946.35 

53* 

33.80 

Pressmen. 

11 

343.72 

7.56 

351.28 

53* 

31.93 

Lithographers. 

45 

1,665.93 

36.65 

1,702.58 

48 

37.82 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cutters, 
machine tenders, etc.. 

43 

1,211.65 

26.66 

1,238.31 

53* 

28.80 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, etc. 

14 

350.22 

7.70 

357.92 

53* 

25.57 

(6) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die 
sinkers.. 

68 

956.79 

21.05 

977.84 

53* 

14.36 

Unskilled help, such as sheet catch¬ 
ers, assorters, and all workers in 
the bookbindery and make-ready 
section. 

137 

1,767.08 

38.88 

1,805.96 

53* 

13.18 


(Signature.)- 

Lepzig, January 23, 1909. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Berlin. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

21 

Marks. 
993. 65 

Marks. 
28. 20 

Marks. 
1,021. 85 

53 

Marks. 

48.65 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

20 

721. 56 

27.00 

748. 56 

53 

37.44 

Pressmen... 

13 

434. 05 

18. 43 

452. 48 

53 

34 80 

Lithographers. 

54 

2,196.40 

74.73 

2,271.13 

48 

42.05 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male- 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

35 

1,281. 45 

34.85 

1,316. 30 

53 

37.60 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

32 

790. 80 

28.02 

818.10 

53 

25. 55 

(b) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 
sinkers . 

60 

1,307.70 

31.30 

1,339. 00 

52 

22. 31 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and 
make-ready section.. 

96 

1,395.75 

54. 21 

1,449. 96 

_ 

62 

15.10 


(Signature.) 


Berlin, January 23, 1909. 




















































WAGES IN GERMANY. 81 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Dresden. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

4 

Marks. 
122.00 

Marks. 

2.72 

Marks. 
124. 72 

216 

Marks. 
31.18 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

4 

109.44 

2. 42 

111.86 

216 

27.96 

Pressmen. 

l 

28.00 

.64 

28.64 

54 

28.64 

Lithographers. 

11 

461.00 

8.13 

469.13 

594 

42.65 

II. Assistants: 

(o) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cutters, 
machine tenders, etc. 

5 

109. 44 

2.00 

112. 04 

270 

22.41 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, 
etc. 

2 

45.42 

1.98 

46. 40 

108 

23. 20 

(b) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 
sinkers . 

9 

97.00 

2.62 

99.62 

486 

11.07 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and make- 
ready section. 

10 

97.00 

2.58 

99.58 

540 

9. 69 


(Signature.)-. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Leutzsch, near 

Leipzig. 


Occupation. 


I. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

Pressmen. 

Lithographers... 

II. Assistants: 

(o) Male— 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cutters, 

machine tenders, etc. 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers,etc. 
(b) Female— 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 

sinkers . 

Unskilled help, such as sheetcatch- 
ers, assorters, and all workers in 
the bookbindery and make- 
ready section. 


Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

13 

Marks. 
513.32 

Marks. 

11.69 

Marks. 

525.01 

51 

Marks. 
40.38 

13 

390.10 

11.23 

401.33 

51 

30.87 

1 

27.99 

.83 

28.82 

51 

28.82 

10 

279.90 

8.25 

288.15 

51 

28.81 

4 

89.59 

2.84 

93.43 

51 

23.36 

26 

294.71 

10.16 

304.87 

51 

11.80 

81 

843.58 

28.59 

872.17 

51 

10.76 


4731—S. Doc. 68, 61-1, pt 2-6 


(Signature.) 




























































82 . WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at Berlin. 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

X. Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

14 

Marks. 
689.50 

Marks. 

13.52 

Marks. 
703.02 

54 

Marks. 

50.21 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

23 

650.50 

23.92 

674. 42 

54 

29.31 

Pressmen. 

8 

225.50 

8.32 

233. 82 

54 

29.23 

Lithographers. 

40 

1, 480. 50 

41.60 

1,522.10 

48 

38.05 

£1. Assistants: 

(a) Male- 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

09 

1,655.00 

50.32 

1,705.32 

54 

24.71 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, etc. 

28 

604.00 

15.96 

619. 96 

54 

22.14 

(6) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 
sinkers. 

32 

476. 50 

10.88 

487. 38 

54 

15.23 

Unskilled help, such as sheet catch¬ 
ers, assorters, and all workers in 
the bookbindery and make-ready 
section... 

89 

' 990.00 

30.26 

1,020.26 

54 

11.46 


(Signature.) — 

Berlin, January 27, 1909. 

Statement of the average weekly wages paid to the whole staff of employees at 


Occupation. 

Number 

of 

workers. 

Total 
pay per 
week. 

Contri¬ 
butions 
for la¬ 
borer in¬ 
surance. 

Total 

expendi¬ 

tures. 

■Hours 
of work 
per week. 

Average 

wages 

per 

laborer 
per week. 

I . Professional workers: 

Master machinists. 

10 

Marks. 
385.89 

Marks. 

5.27 

Marks. 
391.16 

9 

Marks. 
39.12 

Transferrers and pantographers. 

Pressmen. 

} 14 

457.36 

7.36 

464. 72 

9 

33.20 

Lithographers. 

22 

735.22 

11.40 

746. 62 

8 

33.94 

II. Assistants: 

(a) Male- 

Skilled help, such as bookbinders, 
stampers, polishers, label cut¬ 
ters, machine tenders, etc. 

4 

105.00 

1.96 

106. 96 

9 

26.74 

Unskilled help, such as package 
carriers, color mixers, stokers, etc. 

5 

98.80 

1.86 

100 . 66 

9 

20.13 

{&) Female- 

Skilled help, such as feeders, 
stampers, sprinklers, and die- 
sinkers . 

9 

105.04 

2.34 

107. 38 

9 

11.93 

Unskilled help, such as sheet 
catchers, assorters, and all work¬ 
ers in the bookbindery and make- 
ready section. 

9 

86.84 

2.19 

89.03 

9 

9.90 


(Signature.) 


Leipzig, January 28, 1909. 




























































WAGES IN GERMANY 


83 


Master machinists. 

Transferrers and 
pantographers. 

Pressmen. 

Lithographers. 

Male assistants 
(skilled). 

Number 
of work¬ 
ers. 

Total 

average 

wages. 

Number. 

Total 
average 1 
wages. 

Number. 

_ 

Total 

average 

wages. 

[ 

Number. 

Total 

average 

wages. 

Number. 

Total 

average 

wages. 


Marks. 


Marks. 


Marks. 


Marks. 


Marks. 

30 

1,221.96 

44 

1,454.70 i 

41 

1,528.46 

46 

1,850.13 

15 

426.51 

13 

524.15 

18 

547. 30 

5 

181.46 

37 

1,292.63 

3 

75.52 

18 

932.63 

23 

747.35 

6 

208.92 

14 

452.49 

12 

301.03 

15 

515. 71 

13 

415.88 

16 

503.12 

56 

2,008. 71 

50 

1.626.17 

11 

318. 98 

10 

311.90 

4 

122. 32 

28 

896.88 

13 

317. 55 

10 

393.95 

11 

546.89 

1 

31.48 

10 

421. 62 

11 

336.58 

18 

618. 06 

21 

642.43 

18 

553.45 

11 

381. 31 

1 

31.82 

8 

307. 95 

12 

413.54 

2 

64.56 

18 

594. 07 

34 

821.73 

12 

405. 39 

11 

352.37 

5 

145.18 

49 

1,863. 72 

13 

357.85 

8 

333.14 

7 

204.06 

2 

62. 77 

4 

124.90 

10 

290. OS' 

12 

499.17 

13 

419.13 

2 

68.61 

35 

1,270.50 

14 

383.94 

22 

890.59 

32 

992. 22 

4 

127.55 

19 

712. 65 

10 

245.20 

15 

505.15 

14 

406.36 

15 

475. 92 

53 

2,110.71 

41 

1,188.40 

8 

412.24 

9 

317. 02 

10 

259.89 

25 

923.10 

! 16 

447.19 

11 

479. 81 

7 

287.66 

3 

124.24 

44 

1,889.43 

27 

1,035.03 

37 

1,141.00 

30 

941.00 

2 

59. 01 

27 

1,252.68 

5 

154. 70 

4 

124. 72 

4 

111.86 

5 

161.00 

48 

1,593.00 

99 

2,354.00 

20 

739.13 

28 

946.25 

1 

28.64 

11 

469.13 

5 

112.04 

21 

1,021.85 

20 

748.56 

11 

351.28 

45 

1,702.58 

43 

1,238. 31 

32 

1,233.16 

34 

1 ,012. 66 

13 

452.48 

54 

2,271.13 

35 

1,316.30 

13 

525. 01 

13 

401. 33 

6 

196.48 

20 

660.24 

33 

969.78 

14 

703.02 

23 

674. 42 

1 

28. 82 

40 

1,522.10 

10 

288.15 

10 

391.16 

14 

464.72 

8 

233. 82 

22 

746. 62 

69 

1,705.32 









4 

106.96 

362 

14,297. 92 

411 

13,359. 71 

181 

5,966.46 

716 ,27,010.33 

573 

16,130.11 


Male assistants (unskilled). 

Female assistants (skilled). 

Female assistants (unskilled). 

Number. 

Total average 
wages. 

Number. 

Total average 
wages. 

Number. 

Total average 
wages. 

14 

317.30 

38 

511.52 

73 

735.92 



25 

296.99 

71 

676.60 

24 

662.83 

109 

1,905.90 

73 

1,056.39 

3 

77.67 

24 

310.87 

81 

850.24 

17 

484.66 

28 

389.52 

(®) 


6 

102.35 

23 

249.13 

4 

45.08 

18 

365.30 

29 

377.67 

85 

810.40 

4 

81.80 

10 

128.63 

16 

181.30 

5 

110.92 

29 

397.92 

51 

540.58 

12 

230.76 

81 

1,380.01 

49 

634.41 

8 

140.38 

20 

235.57 

71 

693.25 

21 

455.59 

41 

506.09 

153 

1,503.15 

9 

203.26 

35 

495.75 

26 

298.82 

13 

294.47 

42 

834. 46 

87 

1,403.61 

3 

75.55 

13 

169.33 

11 

117.78 

117 

1,877.00 

75 

1,056.00 

44 

517.00 

2 

46.40 

9 

99.62 

10 

99.58 

14 

357.92 

68 

997.84 

137 

1,805.96 

32 

818.10 

60 

1,339.00 

96 

1,449.96 

41 

,804. 70 

61 

889.34 

89 

1,089.83 

4 

92.43 

25 

304.87 

81 

872.17 

28 

619. 96 

32 

487.38 

89 

1,020.26 

5 

100.56 

9 

107.38 

9 

89.03 

400 

8,320.01 

888 

13,450.79 

1,406 

16,491.32 


a Youthful workers. 

Average wages: Master machinists, 39.49 marks; transferrers and pantographers, 32.50 marks; press¬ 
men 32 96 marks; lithographers, 37.72 marks; male assistants (skilled), 28.15 marks; male assistants (un¬ 
skilled), 20.80 marks; female assistants (skilled), 15.14 marks; female assistants (unskilled), 11.73 marics. 

Leipzig, February 3.1909. 














































































84 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


LITHOGRAPHS. 

The following has been reported to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Berlin in regard to pamphlets 11 and 35, pages 1031 and 5181: 

In the following table the average wages and the highest wages for 
lithographic printers and engravers in Berlin are compared with 
those given by Mr. Meyercord. We did not have data for the wages 
of feeders and artists nor for girl labor in the whole of Berlin, and 
therefore the average and maximum wages of one of the most im¬ 
portant firms here are taken as a basis. 

Wages per tceek. 


In America. As stated by Mr. Meyercord. 

In Germany. 

As stated by 
Mr. Meyercord. 

Average and 
maximum 
wages paid. 

Lithographers, $20 to $60. 

$5 to $15. 

$8.50 to $25. 

$8 to $23. 

$3.50 to $5.50. 
$15 to $45. 

$4 to $7. 

Printers, $20 to $35. 

$5 to $8. 

Feeders, $10.50 to $17. 

$3 to $4. 

Painters, $25 to $100. 

$6.25 to $25.... 
$1.25. 

Girls, $5. 




It must be noted that the above figures can not serve alone in a 
comparison with the wages paid in America, as the employers have 
to pay a considerable percentage on laborers’ accident and sick in¬ 
surance. Moreover, in calculating the cost in Germany there is the 
important factor that a machine only makes from 2,500 to 3,500 im¬ 
pressions a day here, while the American machines deliver from 5,500 
to 7,000 impressions a day. Therefore the wages paid per day here 
are distributed among 3,500 sheets at most, whereas those paid in 
America are divided among 7,000 sheets at most. Consequently the 
rate of $20 for a printer in America would be equivalent to $10 in 
Germany. Mr. Meyercord gives the maximum wages as $35 a week, 
which, in view of the foregoing, would correspond to $17.50, while in 
Berlin as high as $23 (more exactly, 93 marks) a week are paid. 

As regards the wages paid to girls, the statements of Mr. Meyer¬ 
cord seems to be drawn from the imagination, as the above-mentioned 
Berlin firm pays an average of $4 and up to a maximum of $7 a week. 
In the above list, as well as in the explanation, the German wages are 
given in dollars for the sake of perspicuity in comparing the Ameri¬ 
can and German wages as alleged by Mr. Meyercord. 

What was said about the wages of printers applies to all other 
expenses necessary in operating a lithographing establishment. 
Taxes, rent, motive power, light, and heat are all distributed here 
each day over a maximum of 3,500 sheets and over 7,000 in America, 
so that in all cases, in calculating the cost, $1 in America is equal to $2 
in Germany. 

As is shown in the hearings before the Committee on Ways and 
Means, Mr. Meyercord not only included the wages of lithographic 
printers, but those also of ordinary printers in the three-color print¬ 
ing. However, ordinary printed matter is practically never exported 
from Germany to the United States. Therefore the wages of ordi- 



















WAGES IN GERMANY. 


85 


nary printers can have no value in comparing the wages of litho¬ 
graphic printers. Mr. Meyercord presumably included these wages 
in order to obtain very high figures. 

It is further asserted by Mr. Meyercord that the cost of materials 
in the United States is considerably increased by high import duties. 
As far as we are informed, imported materials, such as paper, colors, 
etc., are very little used by the American lithographer, and we be¬ 
lieve we do not err in saying that in most cases American paper and 
materials manufactured in America are used. 

That the present duty on lithographic productions is already very 
high and more than offsets the difference between American and 
German wages is shown by the following statement, the two thick¬ 
nesses of paper which are chiefly exported to the United States being 
chosen as an example: 

I. Lithographs on paper over to T A 0 o xr inch thick: 

The wages per 100 sheets are 18.36 marks; the freight, 2 marks; 
the duty 16.50 marks (the latter two items together, 18.50 marks). 

The duty thus amounts to over 100 per cent of the wages. 

II. Lithographs on paper oyer toVV o inch thick: 

The wages are 22.36 marks per 100 sheets; the freight, 6 marks; 
the duty, 36 marks; freight and duty together, 42 marks. 

The duty is 189 per cent of the wages. 

The above example abundantly proves that if anything is done to 
offset the difference in wages in Germany and America it would be 
logical to reduce rather than increase the tariff. 

LITHOGRAPHS. 

The following has been reported to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Frankfort-on-Main in regard to Pamphlets 11 and 35, pages 1031 
and 5181: 

A graphic-art institute makes the following statements regarding 
the wages paid in the graphic industry: 

Proficient lithographers, are paid from 33 to 42 marks a week (32 
to 36 marks according to American statements) in our establishment, 
according to their ability, the hours of work being eight and a yearly 
vacation of ten days with full pay being granted. The foreman of 
the,lithographic department, who was taken from our workshop, re¬ 
ceives a weekly salary of 100 marks, whereby the wages—that is, the 
costs of production—are increased by at least 10 per cent. 

Good printers receive the same wages as lithographers (the Ameri¬ 
cans allege from 20 to 35 marks), the number of hours being nine. 
The head printer receives 65 marks a week and a New Year’s gift of 
100 marks; feeders (male), about 24 marks; feeders (female), about 
15 marks (12 to 16 marks) ; girl assistants, about 12 marks (4 to 6 
marks) per week; laborer assistants and overseers, 24 to 30 marks per 
week. Our laborers therefore receive considerably more (from 20 to 
100 per cent) than given by Mr. Meyercord. Then it must be 
observed that the wages constitute at least 40 per cent of the total 
costs of our production, or as much as said gentleman gives for 
America. We are not able to verify the statements made by Mr. 
Meyercord regarding the wages paid in America, but we are con¬ 
strained to doubt their correctness. 


86 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Schedule M (Paper). 

[Confidential.] 

MEMORIAL REGARDING THE HEARINGS BEFORE THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE 

ON WAYS Alfo MEANS CONCERNING THE DUTIES ON BASIC PAPER IN 

WASHINGTON. 

GENERAL REMARKS. 

The American pulp and paper manufacturers assert, in the hear¬ 
ings before the Committee on Ways and Means, that they did not 
desire a specially high protection for their labor, but merely an off¬ 
setting of their higher expenses as compared with foreign countries 
by means of an increase of the American duties on paper. As a proof 
of the alleged advantage which the German papermaking industry 
enjoys over the American, they refer to the extent of the German 
exports of basic paper to the United States. As is proven in the 

opinion-, this supposition is incorrect, as the total amount of 

the German exports of basic paper to the United States in 1907 was 
only something over 5,000,000 kilograms, with a value of 1J million 
marks in round numbers—that is, one-fourth per cent in round num¬ 
bers of the total German exports to the United States of America. 
In view of the exceedingly great demand for paper in the United 
States on the one hand and of the high development of the German- 
paper industry on the other, which at this very moment has led to a 
considerable overproduction and glutting of the German market, this 
fact alone makes it appear more than probable that the American 
duties on paper are not only sufficient to compensate any existing 
differences in the cost of production, but also to hinder the exporta¬ 
tion of paper to the United States to a notable degree, generally 
speaking. A glance at the American tariff fully corroborates the sup¬ 
position that the American duties on paper are prohibitive. 

As will be thoroughly demonstrated in the following opinions of 
prominent experts in the German paper industry with respect to all 
kinds of paper coming under consideration, the assumption that the 
costs of production in the United States and Germany are approxi¬ 
mately equal is also correct, individually speaking. " The contrary 
statements of the American paper manufacturers before the Commit¬ 
tee on Ways and Means are either based on incorrect information or— 
however regrettable this may be—on a conscious disregard of German 
economic conditions. This applies especially to the statements regard¬ 
ing the alleged wages paid in Germany. Daily wages of 80 pfennigs 
may still occur in East Asia, but they do not exist in the German 
industry. 

In general the wages paid in the United States are perhaps twice 
as high as those in Germany. However, that the American laborer 
accomplishes more than twice as much as his German colleague is 
able to do; that machine labor cuts a much more important figure 
in the United States than in Germany; and, finally, that the part 
represented by the wages in the cost of production of paper is com¬ 
paratively small—all these things are passed over in absolute silence 
by the American paper manufacturers. Moreover, no mention is 
ever made in the hearings before the American tariff committee of 



WAGES IN GERMANY. 8T 

the yearly increasing burdens of the social-insurance system which 
the German paper manufacturer has to bear. 

The American paper manufacturer can obtain a portion of his raw 
materials, such as wood, coal, resin, and casein, cheaper than his Ger¬ 
man competitor. As far as this is not the case, the difficulty could 
easily be remedied by abolishing or reducing American import duties 
on the substances in question. It is certainly not a fair procedure to 
first increase the duties on certain raw materials and then, when com¬ 
plaints are made regarding the higher cost of the manufactured arti¬ 
cle, to increase the duties on the latter also. Another thing to be con¬ 
sidered is that many American factories have water power at their 
disposal to.an extent not even approximated in German} 7 . The asser¬ 
tions that sieves and felts are dearer in America than in Germany may 
best be refuted by referring to the discussion in the American Paper 
Trade Journal regarding the complaints of German paper manufac¬ 
turers concerning the high prices imposed upon them by price-fixing 
unions. This journal calculated at that time that the exportation 
of sieves and felts from the United States to Germany might very 
easily be possible, in spite of the German import duty of 18 marks on 
sieves and 80 marks on felts (see p. 27). 

Conditions are the same as regards machines and parts thereof. 

If the American paper factories labored at so much greater expense 
than the German, it would be quite unexplainable why they conquer 
the field against the German paper industry almost everywhere where 
they enter into competition with them. This is especially the case 
with typewriter and printing paper. The United States have taken 
almost the entire South American market away from the German 
printing-paper factories. In Holland and England American type¬ 
writer paper is found everywhere, the German article hardly being 
seen anywhere. The American typewriter-paper manufacturers are 
actually able to overcome the German duty of 6 marks per 100 kilo¬ 
grams (which is very low, to be sure) and to throw their products on 
the German market with the aid of one or more large typewriter 
importers. 

The means frequently employed by the American paper manufac¬ 
turers in order to make their cost of production seem higher than the 
German consist in comparing high-priced American paper, which is 
also expensive to produce in Germany, with inferior and cheap Ger¬ 
man papers. More will be said on this subject in the opinions 
regarding the various kinds of paper. 

Finally, when the complaint is made that German articles have 
been wrongly declared in the custom-houses such statements have 
remained unproven. Moreover, such occurrences can not be avoided 
by increasing the duties or by placing the articles under classes where 
they do not belong. On the contrary, the result of such a procedure 
would be to encourage wrong declarations. We must also consider in 
this connection that the classification of papers according to the 
purpose for which they are employed has long been abolished and is 
largely obsolete. 

For particular cases the reader is referred to the opinions regarding 
the various kinds of paper, which, as stated before, have been pre¬ 
pared by prominent professional men in the German paper industry 
and are "guaranteed to be reproduced here literally. 


88 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


[No. 396.] 

PRINTING PAPER. 

* * * * * * * 
[Pamphlet 11, pp. 1197-1224.] v 

We see, in the first place, from the hearings that the representative 
of the American newspaper publishers, Mr. Norris, is continuing his 
fight which he began in 1904 before the Committee on the Judiciary 
of the House of Representatives against the International Paper 
Company, using the same weapons, but increasing his demands, 
which he characterizes as follows (Pamphlet 12, pp. 1227-1232) : 

Free pulp, free paper, and reciprocity with Canada for free pulp wood, free 
paper, and free pulp. (Pamphlet 12, p. 1199.) 

We are unable to pass on the velocity of his statements regarding 
the prices of printing paper in the United States and the influence 
exerted thereon by the International Paper Company, nor can we pass 
on the conclusion which he draws therefrom that the International 
Paper Company has created an artificial demand for paper, and that 
the great strike in the paper factories was brought about as a means 
to this end. In answer to this the representatives of the International 
Paper Company maintain that this statement is absolutely exagger¬ 
ated, and that they were obliged to increase their prices because wages 
and wood had considerably increased. If the requests of the publish¬ 
ers were granted, the American paper industry would in the main be 
crushed out by the overwhelming Canadian competition in printing 
paper. 

This struggle has little significance to our German printing paper 
industry, for it is practically impossible to export newspaper print¬ 
ing paper, or even the ordinary German printing papers, to the 
United States under normal circumstances. The American import 
duty of $6 a ton can not be overcome. 

[Pamphlet 12, p. 1272.] 

It is impossible to gather from the wage statistics presented b} r the 
representative of the American paper industry how T the calculation of 
the wages for 1 ton of printing paper was made. The statements 
of the individual wages for the most various kinds of laborers and 
employees may be correct, but the result, that is, the statement quoted 
below, can in no case be correct. This statement, given on page 1279 
of the tariff hearings, is as follows: 

Based on these rates the cost of labor per ton of paper would be 
in each country as follows: 

International Paper Company_$8. 00 


England_ 3.29 

Germany ___ 2. 48 

Sweden_ 2. 22 

Norway_ 2. 22 

Austria_ 2. 09 


It is known that the wages, without regard to the salaries of offi¬ 
cials, in our large, well-conducted printing-paper factories vary from 
1.50 to 2.20 marks per 100 kilograms of paper produced. Smaller 








WAGES IN GERMANY. 


89 


factories working under less favorable conditions often show a higher 
rate. If we add the salaries of officials, the rate increases by about 
20 to 25 pfennigs per 100 kilograms; under some circumstances also 
less. We shall, therefore, not err if we take 2 marks in round num¬ 
bers as the average rate, including both wages and salaries. This is 
20 marks, or $4.75 a ton, and would be twice the amount given on 
page 1279 of the tariff hearings for Germany ($2.48). 

However, the wages are not the determining factor in the produc¬ 
tion of printing paper. Of far greater importance are the costs of 
raw materials and motive power. In this respect the American print¬ 
ing-paper factories are way ahead of the German. Pulp wood can 
be obtained much more cheaply over there. Moreover, the American 
factories have immense water power at their disposal as compared 
to the German factories, and this lowers the cost of production very 
materially. These two facts were passed over in silence in the state¬ 
ments of the American paper manufacturers, as given in the hearings 
before the Committee on Ways and Means. Therefore the Ameri¬ 
cans come to a false conclusion when they say, on page 1279, para¬ 
graph 2: 

Whilp no printing paper is now imported into t lie United States from Eu- * 
ropean countries, we believe that imports would take place from Scandinavia, 
Finland, and Germany if the duty were abolished. 

As a matter of fact. German printing paper could only be imported 
at a great loss to the German factories, even if the American duty 
were entirely removed, because wages and other expenses involved 
in the production of printing paper in German}’ are much higher 
than the Americans suppose. 

The only reason why newspaper printing paper is exported from 
Germany at present is because the existing syndicate—that is, our 
Union of German Printing Paper Factories—is able, owing to its 
organization, to get rid of a surplus production which, it may be 
remarked, amounts to between 5 and 10 per cent of the whole German 
output of printing paper, in doing which it distributes the consider¬ 
able loss which it sustains among all its members, so that but a small 
loss is experienced by each individual member. A German printing- 
paper factory which did not belong to the syndicate would never be 
able to make such exportations, because in doing so alone it would lose 
too much money. 

The false idea which the Americans have of the German printing- 
paper syndicate is shown by the further remark on page 1279, para¬ 
graph 3, which (translated) reads as follows: 

In Germany the prices for home consumption are maintained by a union, 
which is sanctioned by the Government. 

These gentlemen in America know nothing about the attacks made 
against the printing-paper syndicate and the suspicion with which 
the Government always looks upon the actions of the syndicate. From 
the whole hearings it is plainly to be seen that both parties, the 
American newspaper publishers and the American printing-paper 
manufacturers, have made secret inquiries in Germany in order to 
learn all the details concerning the production and sale of printing 
paper, and that in some cases that which is claimed to have been 
found out is absolutely erroneous. The thought occurs to one that the 


90 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


questioned parties, surmising the intention, knowingly told that which 
is untrue. This is the only way in which the discrepancy between the 
statements and actual facts can be explained. 

[No. 402.] 

WAUL PAPER. 

[Pamphlet 11, p. 1126 et seq.; pamphlet 21, p. 2722 et seq.] 
sfe * * ' * * * * 

The printed document transmitted to me a few days ago, relating 
to the proceedings before the Committee on Ways and Means, is 
hereby returned, with the remark that the matter under discussion in 
these proceedings was not wall paper (Tapetenpapier), but paper 
hangings (Tapeten), or an already elaborated paper. Then, again, 
the only hangings coming under consideration are the better or finer 
kinds, on which the duty is considered insufficient, while the cheaper 
and ordinary hangings are not referred to. 

The question as to how far the statements regarding conditions of 
production in Germany are correct is one which must be investigated 
• by the manufacturers of paper hangings. 

Even under the present conditions—that is, tariff rates—wall paper 
can not be exported to North America. However, if such exports 
occur, notwithstanding my belief, they are made under the designa¬ 
tion of “ printing paper.” This may be very easily supposed, for the 
reason that wall papers are now often delivered in rolls wrapped up 
by a rotary process, the same as printing paper. 

In the case of ordinary cheap kinds of wall paper the price is, more¬ 
over, approximately the same as that of printing paper. Inasmuch as 
“ Tapeten ” are called “ wall paper ” and “ paper hangings ” in the 
English language, one may easily make the mistake of supposing that 
wall paper (Tapetenpapiere) is meant instead of paper hangings 
(Tapeten). 

Paper factories would be called “ paper mills,” whereas in the 
printed pamphlet only “ wall-paper manufacturers ” are referred to. 

[Nos. 396, 397, 401.] 

TYPEWRITER PAPER. 

[Pamphlet 11, p. 1180 et seq. ; pamphlet 12, p. 1261 et seq.] 
*'*■«*■»***■•* 

According to the commercial statistics of the United States, the 
total exports to Germany in 1907 amount to $274,000,000 and the 
total imports from Germany $161,000,000. 

According to the statements of the Imperial Statistical Bureau, 
volume 190, pamphlet 19, the exports of paper from the United 
States to Germany in 1907 amounted to 652,500 kilograms, worth 
249,000 marks (see Appendix A), or in round numbers $60,000, and 
the exports of paper from Germany to the United States amounted 
to 5,096,600 kilograms, worth 1,796,000 marks (see Appendix B), or 
in round numbers $430,000. 

Therefore in the total sum of imports from Germany in 1907, 
amounting to $161,000,000, as given by the United States, the paper 
item was represented by about $430,000, or 0.26 per cent. 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


91 


In the face of this infinitesimally small quantity of paper exported 
to the United States from Germany, the American authority being 
heard on this matter stated to the chairman as follows (see p. 1181. 
Tariff Hearings) : 

I should say that the importation was probably one-third of the consumption 
on the manifold papers, the onion skins, and the typewriter manifold papers—I 
should say that the importation was probably one-third. 

The American authority here quoted thus declares that one-third 
of the entire consumption of typewriter papers (onion skins and type¬ 
writer manifold papers) is imported into the United States. He 
expressly affirms this again in answer to the question of the chairman, 

“ two-thirds produced in the United States,” by saying, “ Yes, sir; I 
should say about that.” 

The civilization of that country, so blessed with riches and peopled 
by about 76,000,000 inhabitants, must indeed be in a sorry plight 
if the statements of this authority are true, and if the exceedingly 
small quantity of paper imported, of which, moreover, only a very 
small fraction consists of typewriter paper, constitutes one-third of 
the total consumption. 

If we wish to ascertain the qualities of typewriter paper referred 
to by this authority in these hearings we may find them in the record 
of the proceedings (see page 1180 of the Tariff Hearings) : 

The price at which they are imported is very low, the price at the port 
of entry being about 5 or 6 cents a pound, and they are sold in this country 
at 8 cents. Now, the cheapest paper we can make of that character is from 
13 cents to 35 cents. 

These prices per English pound are as follows, reckoned according 
to kilograms! Five cents a pound=46.3 pfennigs per kilogram; 6 
cents a pound=55.5 pfennigs per kilogram. 

These prices, according to the statements of the aforementioned 
authority, are understood to be free port of entry. If we estimate 
the freight by sea from the German port to America, in addition to 
the land freight in Germany to the port, at a total of about 4 pfennigs 
per kilogram, we find the value of the paper shipped from the Ger¬ 
man factory to be about 42 and 51 pfennigs per kilogram, respec¬ 
tively. This shows clearly that the American authority referred to 
those classes of German papers which are totally or principally made 
of wood pulp or straw pulp; that is, the kinds which are usually 
termed “ substitute papers ” in Germany. When the American wit¬ 
ness declares to the chairman that “ the cheapest paper we can make 
of that character is from 13 cents to 35 cents a pound ” (that is, 1.20 
to 3.20 pfennigs per kilogram), this would show a tremendous su¬ 
periority on the part of the German paper industry if the statements 
of the declarant were free from criticism. However, as a matter of 
fact, the declarant is silent regarding the fact that the price of 13 
cents to 35 cents a pound (1.20 to 3.20 pfennigs per kilogram) can 
only relate to the very finest papers, made from the most expensive 
rags, for which of course many times the price must be charged and 
paid that is charged for “ substitute papers.” It is just as if one 
were to compare the cheapest kind of so-called “ wood-free writing 
paper ” with expensive bank-note paper. The authority being heard 
must either be anything but a paper expert or else it is his intention 
to mislead the chairman. 


92 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


The question whether the American paper consumer, to whom the 
German “ substitute paper ” appears appropriate for his special pur¬ 
poses at the price of 8 cents, would be satisfied to pay 18 to 35 cents 
for American paper instead of 8 cents for German paper if compelled 
to do so, may be decided by the American customs law. 

The witness in question demands that papers of this kind be taxed 
in future according to 401, and that this item be changed in future as 
follows: 

writing, letter, note, handmade, genuine or imitation, sized or unsized, if 
deckled on two or more sides, drawing, ledger, bond, record, tabled, typewriter 
paper, cover papers, Japan-paper, genuine or imitation— 

(a) If weighing not more than 8 pounds to the ream of 500 sheets 17/21i, 6 
cents per pound and 15 per cent ad valorem (p. 1180). 

The duty would accordingly amount to 6-J cents if the importing 
value were 5 cents a pound, and this would be 135 per cent of the 
importing value. 

(5) If weighing over 8 pounds and not over 10 pounds, 5 cents per pound and 
15 per cent ad valorem. 

The duty would accordingly amount to 5| cents if the importing 
value were 5 cents a pound, and this would be 115 per cent of the 
importing value. 

(c) If weighing not less than 10 pounds and not over 15 pounds, 2 cents per 
pound and 15 per cent ad valorem (p. 1184). 

The duty would accordingly amount to 2f cents if the importing 
value were 5 cents a pound, and this would be 55 per cent of the 
importing value. 

( d) If weighing more than 15 pounds, 31 cents per pound and 15 per cent ad 
valorem. 

The duty would accordingly amount to 44 cents if the importing 
value were 5 cents a pound, and this w T ould be 85 per cent of the 
importing value. 

Such rates of duty are in reality equivalent to a prohibition to 
import. 

[Pp. 1261, 1267, and 1277.] 

The American paper manufacturers point out that the wages in the 
United States are many times higher than those paid in foreign coun¬ 
tries, especially in Germany. Tt was asserted that a laborer earns $3 
in America to $1 abroad. To be sure it is added that the American 
laborer is capable of performing more work and that five laborers in 
America perform as much in a day as six laborers in Germany. Ac¬ 
cording to this, foreign labor, especially German labor, would be 
calculated at 40 per cent of the American. There is no evidence to 
prove this figure, and it is to be doubted whether such a difference 
exists. Moreover, in paper making the wages themselves are far 
from being as important a factor as, for instance, in the textile and 
machine industry. It must also not be left out of consideration iliat 
a large part of the manual labor performed in paper factories (cut¬ 
ting, assorting, separating into reams, etc.) is performed by cheap 
female laborers. In a German paper factory making paper worth 
from 5 to 6 cents per English pound, the wages are calculated at 
about 12 per cent of the selling value of the product. This factory 
obtains its pulp ready made from other factories, and so the wages 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


93 


mentioned relate only to the paper making itself. Assuming now 
that the American wages are really 60 per cent higher, the cost of 
production of papers of the value mentioned would only be increased 
by 18 per cent of the value of the paper through the wages paid. 
Even such a difference in the rates of wages (and we deny that it is 
as great as claimed) would not justify a duty of 55, 85, 115, and 135 
per cent of the value of the paper. In the main, however, we must 
point out that in the American paper mills a much greater specializa¬ 
tion prevails in the manufacture of paper than in Germany; that this 
strictly followed specialization effects a considerable saving in wages; 
and that finally manual labor is superseded by machinery in America 
more than in Germany. Calculated according to the value of the 
finished product, the difference in wages will probably be found to be 
much less than the Americans claim. 

We may also refer here to the fact that the American paper manu¬ 
facturer is unacquainted with the burdens which the German paper 
maker has to assume in connection with the provision for laborers 
under the social laws (contributions for accident and disability 
insurance). 

[Pages 1181-1182.] 

The American paper manufacturers finally make the assertion that, 
paper imported to America from abroad is often wrongly declared 
(in the custom-house). They also state that writing paper is mostly 
assessed as printing paper. 

The instructions as to how a paper shall be declared are usually 
given by the purchaser. These instructions must necessarily be 
governed by the purpose for which the paper is to be used. This 
purpose for which the paper is to be used can not be told by looking 
at the paper. Xo one can assert that this or that paper can only be 
used for writing or for printing purposes. The line of demarcation 
has disappeared in the course of time. There are no longer any ab¬ 
solute marks of distinction with regard to the use to which various 
kinds of paper may be put. One and the same variety of paper often 
serves the most various uses, being employed sometimes for writing, 
sometimes for printing, and sometimes for packing. Innumerable 
printed documents, circulars, advertisements, etc., are printed on 
paper which one is usually inclined to call writing paper. On the 
other hand, much commercial correspondence which is manifolded by 
means of mimeographs (circulars, advices, price lists, etc.) is done 
on soft paper with little sizing, which must be regarded as printing 
paper rather than as writing paper. A classification according to use 
would seem no longer to be possible in actual practice, and this is as 
true in America as in foreign countries. At all events the statement 
made by the American paper manufacturers for purposes of competi¬ 
tion that the imported writing papers are fraudulently declared as 
printing papers is not susceptible of proof. 

Between the duties collected in America on German papers and 
those collected in German} 7 on American papers there is an unparal¬ 
leled disproportion. The German paper industry would rejoice if it 
could ever succeed in having the paper imported to Germany sub¬ 
jected to as high a duty as German paper has to pay in America. 


94 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Germany imports from the United States of America. 


654 
655a j 
655b i 
655c 
655d 

655e 

655f 

655g 

655h 



1907. 

Dozen 

(100kg.).: 

Pqekimy no npr pnlnrpd in thp nil In . 

2,346 ! 61 

57 , 2 

26 1 2 

648 1 65 

1 

3,301 106 

17 ' 1 

34 3 

13 ; 2 

83 ( 7 


r!iird hoard pYppnt pravnn hoard . 


Packing paper, colored in the pulp, smooth on both sides, tissue paper 

Parchment paper .-. 



Other paper . 


6,525 ! 249 


1907; Imports from the United States of America 652,000 kilograms, of a value of 
249,000 marks. Paper=equals $60,000 in round numbers. 

Gei'many exports to the United States of America. 


1907. 


/ 


654 

656a 

655b 

655c 

655d 

655e 

655f 

655g 

655h 


Packing paper colored in the pulp. 

Printing paper...... 

Cardboard except crayon board. 

Blotting paper, white, etc., filtering tissue paper. 

Packing paper colored in the pulp, smooth on both sides, tissue paper 

over 30 grams per square meter. 

Parchment paper. 

Writing, letter, handmade, and note paper. 

Drawing paper, crayon board. 

Other paper.,.. 


i 


Dozen 
(100 kg.). 

Value in 
1,000 
marks. 

12,226 

318 

10,513 

231 

1,308 

63 

1,653 

132 

20,058 

642 

217 

13 

1,030 

58 

2,245 

202 

1,716 

137 

50,966 

1,796 


1907 : Exports to the United States of America 5,096,600 kilograms, of a value of 
1,796,000 marks. =$430,000 in round numbers. 

******* 


[Pamphlet 11, p. 779.] 

The American paper manufacturers seek to represent their condi¬ 
tions so as to make it appear that they are unable to manufacture as 
cheaply as German factories. For this purpose they refer to the 
prices of raw materials and machinery, which make the situation 
appear unfavorable to them. However, if we examine thoroughly 
into the matter we shall find, in the first place, that a part of the 
alleged prices have comparatively little to do with the cost of produc¬ 
tion. For instance, they state that the duty on china clay is $2.50 
a ton. However, china clay is really unnecessary in the manufacture 
of typewriter paper, and for that matter the United States could re¬ 
duce or abolish the duty mentioned. The duty on felts also cuts no 
figure, for the Americans make their own felts cheaper than they 
can obtain them abroad. The same is the case with the sifting cloths, 
and this is still more true in the case of cotton dry felts. The high 
duty on hemp string sounds very formidable in this connection, but 


















































WAGES IN GERMANY. 


95 


in what way are hemp strings used in paper making? Parts of the 
machinery are made cheaper in America than here. Calcinated soda 
is produced cheaper in America, and leather straps are likewise 
cheaper in America than in Germany. The same is true with rubber 
belts. The only material of all those mentioned which is dearer in 
America than in Germany is the chlorid of lime, but the duty on 
this article could also be abolished, or at least reduced, there. 

The data regarding wages in America are estimated abundantly 
high and those in Germany too low. We can not obtain any female 
laborers here at 80 pfennigs, as was stated before the committee. 
This is impossible, for we pay more than twice that much here. The 
wages paid to manual laborers is higher in America, to be sure, but 
the amount of labor is greater and more work is done by machinery 
than here. The wages for good laborers in Germany is estimate!! 
too low. We also have no machine operators under 2,000 marks a 
year. On the other hand, however, the Americans have extraordi- 
nearily cheap water power, and for the most part very cheap coal and 
cheaper resin. Furthermore, our tremendous expenses for providing 
for laborers under the social laws must be considered, this being a 
thing unknown to Americans. 

As a matter of fact, the American paper mills are able to manu¬ 
facture typewriter paper as cheap as we. This is shown by the fact 
that large quantities of typewriter paper are imported into Germany, 
and that America is the greatest competitor of the German factories 
abroad. I should like merely to mention that the larger part of the 
typewriter paper imported into Holland and England is from the 
United States, and that we have been unable to drive the Americans 
out of that field. 

The Americans really do not wish to offset the cheaper production 
in Germany by means of an imporl duty, but they wish to create 
tariffs which will be prohibitive. As regards the specially light 
varieties of typewriter paper (onion skins), America is able at 
present to produce them cheaper than ourselves by means of specially 
constructed machines. The statements of the American manufac¬ 
turers are not really true. The American paper mills are producing 
to-day an onion-skin note paper weighing 18 grams at 6J cents. We 
can not do this. America is to-day manufacturing a good quality of 
onion-skin paper on these special machines at about 120 pfennigs in 
German money. This is exactly the same price at which this kind 
of paper can be manufactured here. The Americans compare the 
good American with the poorer German qualities as they see fit and 
according to the necessity of the moment. 

[No. 402.] 

IMITATION PARCHMENT, PERGAMYN, AND PARCHMENT SUBSTITUTE. 

[Pamphlet 11, p. 1070 et seq.; pamphlet 35, p. 5221 et seq.] 

* * * * * * * 

* * * of which I am managing partner, produces on three ma¬ 

chines exclusively grease-proof papers out of cellulose (pulpi, ma¬ 
chine-smooth and glazed. The former paper is known to the trade in 
Germany under the name of parchment substitute and in America as 


96 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


grease-proof, and the latter is known in Germany as pergamyn and 
in America as parchmine or glassine. In the production of these va¬ 
rieties of paper, cellulose is used exclusively, bleached cellulose being 
used for the better kinds, first and second class, and unbleached for 
the inferior kinds. The prices of these materials delivered free to our 
factory are as follows: 

Marks. 


Bleached cellulose_25. 50 

First-class, unbleached_19. 50 

Second-class, unbleached_18. 50 


The manufacture of the better kinds out of bleached material 
naturally costs more than the inferior varieties made of unbleached 
material. 

Intermediate varieties are also produced in which bleached and 
first-class unbleached material is used in various proportions mixed. 

The cost of production in Germany amounts to the following sums: 


Marks. 

Machine-smooth parchment substitute (grease proof) of bleached 

cellulose, according to quality- 20. 00-30. 00 

Machine-smooth parchment substitute (grease proof) of first-class 

unbleached cellulose, acording to quality--- 19. 00-25.00 

Machine-smooth parchment substitute (grease proof) of second- 

class unbleached cellulose, according to quality_18. 00-19. 00 

To these costs should be added the depreciation per 100 kilograms, 
which in our factory is- 1. 50 

Accordingly the various kinds of paper would cost as follows: 

1. First-class parchment substitute (grease proof) of bleached ma¬ 

terial— Marks. 

Cellulose___^_ 25. 50 

Cost of manufacture_ 20. 00-30. 00 

Sinking fund-,- 1. 50 

Cost of production at factory_ 47. 00-57. 00 

2. Parchment substitute (grease proof) of first-class unbleached 

material— 

First-class unbleached cellulose_ 19. 50 

Cost of manufacture____ 19. 00-25. 00 

Depreciation__ 1. 50 

Cost of production at factory_ i _ 40.00-57.00 

3. Parchment substitute of second-class unbleached material— 

Second-class unbleached cellulose_ IS. 50 

Cost of manufacture- _ 18.00-20.00 

Depreciation__ 1. 50 

Cost of production at factory_ 38. 00-40. 00 


My firm, as stated before, manufactures from the same materials 
also its second quality, namely, pergamyn (parchmine or glassine), 
which does not differ essentially in its production from the first-men¬ 
tioned variety, but which is specially smoothed, whereby it is given 
a bright surface and greater transparency. 

The cost of production of this kind of paper is increased by the 
smoothing process by about 4 marks per 100 kilograms, the cost of 
coloring being added in the case of the colored varieties. 

My firm exports to the United States chiefly its lowest quality of 
machine-smooth parchment substitute (grease proof), made of un¬ 
bleached second-class cellulose, f. o. b. Rotterdam, at the price of 36 
marks. 

Second in importance comes a mixed variety consisting of lb and 
la unbleached cellulose, f. o. b. Rotterdam, at the price of 38 marks. 





















WAGES IN GERMANY. 97 

^ 1" urthermore, a mixture of bleached and first-class unbleached cel¬ 
lulose, f. o. b. Rotterdam, at the price of 46 marks. 

Of smoothed pergamyn (parchmine or glassine) my firm exports 
to the United States an inferior quality made of unbleached lb cel¬ 
lulose, f. o. b. Rotterdam, at the price of 40 marks. 

Smoothed parchment (parchmine or glassine), consisting of a mix¬ 
ture of lb and la unbleached cellulose, at the price of 44 marks. 

A pergamyn (parchmine or glassine) of first-class unbleached cel¬ 
lulose, at the price of 48 marks. 

As is shown by the foregoing data, the prices obtained by our goods 
sold in the United States do not quite equal the cost. My firm is com¬ 
pelled to sell at these prices by the difficult conditions of sale and by 
competition. However, my firm can not entirely do without the 
orders from the United States, but takes them at the afore-mentioned 
losing prices in order to dispose of its output and to relieve the Ger¬ 
man market. 

The two varieties of paper produced by my firm, machine-smooth 
parchment substitute and pergamyn (grease proof and parchmine or 
glassine), are used in the most various w r ays. The former is used 
principally for packing provisions of all kinds, and the latter is used 
in the same way and also, owing to its transparency, for various other 
purposes; for instance, for envelopes, for sheets laid between illus¬ 
trations, for pasting over window panes, for lamp shades, etc. 

The grease-proof papers produced by us out of cellulose differ from 
the so-called vegetable parchment chiefly in that our papers are only 
proof against grease and not against dampness, and therefore dissolve 
in water, while vegetable parchment is proof not only against grease 
but also against dampness and can not be dissolved at all. 

While our papers are produced exclusively from cellulose, vegetable 
parchment consists only of cotton fiber, which is worked up into paper 
in the paper mill and is only then made into parchment by a special 
process. 

The cost of production of this cotton paper for vegetable parch¬ 
ment is about the same as that of our machine-smooth paper in gen¬ 
eral, and this is also the case in the United States. However, in the 
case of vegetable parchment there must also be added to this cost of 
production the cost of converting into parchment, which is almost 
equally high, so that this paper costs almost twice as much as ours— 
that is, as imitation parchment. The selling price of vegetable parch¬ 
ment is in fact also about twice as high as that of imitation 
parchment. 

I make these statements to you on the basis of the books of the 
factory and on that of my experience and knowledge of this branch 
of industry. 

******* 
[Pamphlet 11, p. 1070.] 

My remarks regarding the tariff hearings will relate to the manu¬ 
facture of imitation and grease-proof papers, or, as they are more 
specifically designated in these hearings, imitation parchment, perga¬ 
myn, and parchment substitute, as far as they are shipped in a natu¬ 
ral condition or colored, smooth, and watermarked (gepragt), and 
also machine smooth, moderately smoothed, highly smoothed, and 
prepared with hygroscopic ingredients. 

4731—S. Doc. 68, 61-1, pt 2-7 


98 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


[Pamphlet 11, p. 1071.] 

The Americans, in order to corroborate their assertions, refer 
wrongly at the same time to Scandinavia and Germany, whereas 
every person who is even partially acquainted with the subject knows 
that the goods thrown on the American market by Scandinavia can 
not be compared with the American product, and much less with the 
German, and that they can never take the place of American or 
German goods where the latter are required. 

First of all, I will take the liberty of calling attention to a great 
error in the statements of the American paper manufacturers, which 
occurs in almost all the testimony, and is as follows: 

[Pamphlet 11, p. 1077.] 

That imitation parchments, parchment substitute, pergamyn, and glassine or 
japanin are identical with genuine parchment paper and can only be distin¬ 
guished by experts, and that they likewise hardly differ from genuine parchment 
in their methods of production. 

This statement is wholly incorrect, for the first-mentioned papers 
are produced on the well-known long-sieve paper machine without 
any subsequent treatment, exactly the same as all other papers, such 
as printing, writing, packing, etc., paper, while the genuine parch¬ 
ment papers are mostty produced from cotton fiber or a mixture of 
the latter with cellulose, being, to be sure, also made in the paper 
machine like paper, but receiving subsequently a treatment with sul¬ 
phuric acid in the sulphuric-acid bath and then washed out. It is 
to this complicated and expensive manipulation that genuine parch¬ 
ment, just as all papers subjected to a subsequent treatment, owes its 
correspondingly higher market price, which is at least twice as high 
as that of the first-mentioned varieties. 

It is still more incomprehensible how the Americans can assert that 
the first-mentioned papers can not be distinguished from genuine 
parchment paper. I take the liberty in this connection of quoting the 
interpretation given in the customs negotiations with Austria- 
Hungary in which the Austrian paper manufacturers express them¬ 
selves clearly and distinctly regarding the distinction between imita¬ 
tion and grease-proof papers and genuine parchment, as follows: 

All papers are regarded as imitation parchment papers (pergamyn, imitation 
parchment, parchment substitute, glassine, and japanin) which are produced 
from sulfite cellulose or very finely ground pulp. They are distinguished from 
genuine parchment papers by the fact that the fibers are recognizable at places 
where tom, especially when the paper has previously been dipped in water. 
If carefully held over a fine flame they show many diminutive bubbles or a 
white opaque spot, and after long boiling in water can be stirred into a pulp. 

[Pamphlet 25, p. 5221.] 

Before examining into the cost of production of imitation parch¬ 
ment in America and Germany I can not help pointing to the fact 
that the statement of the Americans to the effect that in Germany the 
manufacturers of these papers are united by a syndicate or convention 
and now throw their surplus product on the American market at a 
loss is not in accordance with facts. All efforts to reach any agreement 
for the sake of improving prices on these papers at home or abroad 
have thus far always failed and will moreover never attain their 
purpose, for the reason that the qualities of the various factories 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


99 


differ so greatly. The assertion of the American paper manufactur¬ 
ers that the German manufacturers of the papers in question pro¬ 
duce their own pulp and therefore have a great advantage over them 
is also in the main based on an error, since not one-fifth of these paper 
manufacturers produce their own pulp, while four-fifths of them pro¬ 
cure it from remote regions and, as we shall see later on, no more 
cheaply than American manufacturers. Moreover, probably even 
the one-fifth of the manufacturers who produce their ow T n pulp derive 
no special advantage from this fact, for, apart from the fact that 
these factories must charge their pulp up to their paper mill at the 
market price, they have the great disadvantage of being dependent 
on the single quality of pulp which they produce and therefore can 
only prepare certain limited qualities of paper, whereas the so-called 
exclusive paper factories are able, by combining various pulps, not 
only to produce better qualities of paper, but also to work to greater 
advantage financially. 

The complaints of the American importers and of the paper- 
elaborating industry, to the effect that the American paper mills are 
by no means able to fill the demand for these classes of paper, is not 
unwarranted. Probably the Americans will never engage in exten¬ 
sive manufacture of these kinds of paper, as they are compelled to 
depend on manufacturing in massive quantities by machinery, owing 
to the limited supply of laborers at their disposal." Therefore we also 
find that the American laborer is cheaper to his employer than the 
German laborer, even though he receives twice the salary paid in 
Germany. The American produces at least twice the amount of 
finished paper with a given number of laborers that we do here in 
Germany. Likewise, coal, resin, potato flour, and all materials in 
general required in paper making are cheaper than in German}^ 
without mentioning the great water power which almost all American 
paper manufacturers have at their command. To this may be added 
the expenses for sick funds, trades unions, etc., which have to be borne 
in Germany under the social laws and which are unknown to the 
American, but which greatly increase our management expenses. 

I shall, furthermore, take the liberty, before making a comparison 
of the actual cost of these papers in Germany with the cost of produc¬ 
tion in America, to state that all papers which undergo a further 
treatment after being produced, such as coated paper, waxed paper, 
genuine parchment, paper with a metal surface, albumen paper, etc., 
and which therefore represent a higher value owing to this expensive 
and time-consuming treatment, ought to be subject to a duty of 2| 
cents per pound and 15 per cent ad valorem according to item 398. 
On the contrary, all imitation parchments and grease-proof papers 
belong to those" which are prepared directly on the paper machines 
and at most only undergo a smoothing process afterwards, such as 
writing, printing, book, etc., paper; these should be subject only to a 
duty of 25 per cent ad valorem, for it would not be right for these 
papers, which frequently are of a lower price than writing papers, 
etc., to be subject to a higher duty. 

The cost of production of these papers must at least be as high in 
Germany as in America, since many of the raw materials, as men¬ 
tioned above, are dearer in Germany than in America. The higher 
wages in the United States are entirely offset by the greater energy 
of the Americans and by their machinery. 


100 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


It is quite correct that the papers in question are produced from 
bleached and unbleached sulfite pulp. The prices of this pulp are as 
follows, on an average, in accordance with data furnished me from 
all parts of the German Empire: 

^ 1 Marks. 

Bleached cellulose _25. 50 

Unbleached cellulose_19. 50 

Second-class unbleached pulp_18. 50 

The management expenses increase considerably in the case of these 
papers, being greater in proportion to the fineness of quality and 
lightness of weight required. They probably amount to front 14 to 
30 marks per 100 kilograms of paper. If we now take as a basis paper 
weighing 40 grams per square meter, which is the weight most in 
demand and which was probably referred to by the Americans in 
their statements, the cost of production will be as follows: 

Marks. 

Machine-smoothed parchment substitute (grease proof) of bleached cellu¬ 


lose_ 20-30 

Do. of first-class unbleached cellulose_18-24 

Do. of second-class unbleached cellulose_14-18 


In the case of pergamyn, glassine and Japanin the expenses are in¬ 
creased by 2 marks per 100 kilogramsowing to the high polish and the 
cost of production is increased by over 5 per cent as compared with 
parchment substitute papers, owing to the losses. According to these 
statements, therefore, we should have the following market value: 


Marks. 

Parchment substitute of pure bleached cellulose_25. 50 

Plus average cost of production_25. 00 

Plus 10 per cent loss of material_^_ 5. 05 


55. 55 


Parchment substitute of first-class unbleached cellulose_19. 50 

Plus cost of production_21. 00 

Plus loss of 10 per cent_ 4. 05 


44. 55 


Parchment substitute of second-class unbleached cellulose_18. 50 

Plus cost of production_16. 00 

Plus 10 per cent loss__ 3. 35 


37. 85 

In these costs of production, freight up to 2 marks per 100 kilo¬ 
grams is included. Quite similar to these prices are the intermediate 
grades, half bleached and unbleached, half first-class and half second- 
class, or one-third and two-thirds, or one-fourth and three-fourths 
materials, etc. 

The so-called “ pergamyn ” (parchmine, glassine, Japanin, silver, 
etc.) are produced from the same materials, only that the cost of pro¬ 
duction is increased by the higher smoothing, as remarked above, to 
the extent of 2 marks per 100 kilograms, and the loss by 5 per cent, 
so that the cost of pergamyn is as follows: 

Marks. 


Of pure bleached cellulose_60. 38 

Of first-class unbleached cellulose_48. 87 

Of second-class unbleached cellulose_ 41 . 96 



























WAGES IN GERMANY. 


101 


[Pamphlet 11, p. 1095 et setj.] 


It is plainly seen from the foregoing figures that the American 
paper manufacturers gave absolutely incorrect figures in estimating 
the values of grease proof and of glassine papers in Germany. It is 
absolutely impossible to buy sulfite cellulose in Germany for $35 
(147 marks) a ton, as stated by the Americans, nor can the cost of 
production in Germany be estimated at $32.74 a ton (138.80 marks). 

In comparing the wages paid, the American paper manufacturers 
wisely omit Germany entirely and give only a comparison of Sweden 
and America. To this I can only repeat that the Swedish make of 
these papers can not compete with the American and German. If, 
however, we were to calculate the wages paid to-day in Germany, in 
addition to the contributions required by the social laws, these wages 
would probably not be far below the American. At all events the 
wages reckoned per 100 kilograms of paper are not much higher in 
America than in Germany, as was stated above. 

[Page 1112.] 

The proposal of the same gentleman to add an amendment to para¬ 
graph 401 providing for an increase of duty on typewriter paper and 
onionskin paper is incomprehensible to me for the reason that papers 
weighing not less than 10 pounds already come under paragraph 401. 
I simply do not believe that the importers have been importing this 
paper as printing paper provided for under paragraph 390 at only 
4 cent per pound, when it weighs less than 10 pounds a ream (less 
than 244 grams per square meter). However, if this were the case 
it would again show the great injustice of a thin paper paying a 
much lower duty when used for printing purposes than an inferior 
tissue paper used for wrapping purposes or for the fancy paper 
industry. 

The opinion of Mr. Buck that thin typewriter paper below 25 
grams per square meter delivered free to port of shipment costs 6 
cents a pound or 44 pfennigs per kilogram is certainly erroneous. 
As far as I have manufactured manifolding paper (Durchsclireib- 
papier), it costs 70 pfennigs and over. 

I should consider it just if paragraph 401 were to receive an amend¬ 
ment providing that the papers therein mentioned, including cover 
papers, should pay a duty of 3 cents a pound and 10 per cent ad 
valorem if weighing under 10 pounds; that is, over 0 pounds but not 
over 10 pounds, and that all paper weighing over 10 pounds should 
pay 2 cents a pound and 10 per cent ad valorem as heretofore. 

Onion-skin paper and typewriter paper weighing between 6 and 10 
pounds per ream of 480 20 by 30 inch sheets could really even now 
be included by the American customs officials under paragraph 397. 
A subdivision of 6 to 8 pounds per ream and 8 to 10 pounds per ream 
is. at all events undesirable, as the difficulty of keeping within the 
right limits of weight might easily lead to charges of fraud and to 
the imposition of fines. 

It appears that under the protection of the enormous tariff on tissue 
paper the four American paper mills have a trust and that, therefore, 
the paper-goods factories in America have to pay very high prices for 
tissue paper. There is, however, no reason why cheaper tissue papers 


102 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


ranging in price from 30 to 60 pfennigs should be subjected to a pro¬ 
tective tariff of about 100 per cent, for these papers are made on quick¬ 
running machines in which little manual labor is necessary. Besides, 
there is a firm in the United States called the “ Dennison Manufactur¬ 
ing Company,” at 26 to 28 Franklin street, Boston, which produces 
such large quantities of crape paper that it can make heavy exports to 
Germany. 

[Nos. 397 and 407.] 

^ ^ ^ 
[Pamphlet 11, page 1103 et seq.] 

The firm of-had the kindness some time ago to send 

us a copy of the statements made before the American Committee on 
Ways and Means regarding tissue paper. We can but agree to the 
statements of this firm as a whole, which are very much to the point. 
Regarding No. 407, paper goods, or the basic papers used therein, 
we are unable to give an opinion, because we do not manufacture the 
papers in question. The principal article which we export to the 
United States is the basic paper for carbon papers. In this paper 
the minimum weight limit coming under consideration is 10 grams 
per square meter—that is, about 4 pounds to 480 sheets measuring 
20 by 30 inches. Accordingly, No. 397, with the weight limits speci¬ 
fied therein of 6 pounds 20 by 30 inches and over 6 pounds 20 by 30 
inches, is the principal rate of duty paid by us. Here the duty, which 
is 55 pfennigs on paper weighing 6 pounds and below and 46 pfennigs 
on that weighing 6 to 10 pounds, is extraordinarily high if we con¬ 
sider that there is an ad valorem duty of 15 per cent additional. The 
ad valorem duty is, to be sure, calculated according to the German 
fundamental price (Gundpreis). If, for instance, a paper costs 2 
marks per kilogram, the ad valorem duty would amount to 30 pfen¬ 
nigs. However, paper costing 2 marks weighs over 6 pounds, so that 
85 pfennigs would have to be paid in duty alone. We believe it 
unnecessary to explain further how so tremendous a duty must exert 
an unfavorable influence on the exportation of these papers. As a 
matter of fact it will be exceedingly difficult to transact any business 
if higher duties are adopted. Moreover, such a high duty would be 
absolutely without purpose, for according to the statements of vari¬ 
ous large American importers the Americans are unable to produce a 
good quality of such thin special papers. Therefore all basic paper 
used for this purpose must come from abroad, and if No. 397 were 
further increased the consumers would have to use other thicker 
papers. The present duty is already unusually high and obstructive, 
and a higher rate would certainly entirely ruin the business. 

Under No. 397 come also other special papers, such as copying, 
stereotype, and other tissue papers. In these varieties no business 
can be done even now, for the simple reason that such papers can not 
stand so high a duty. In past years we used to export considerable 
quantities of still other special papers, such as onionskin paper, to 
the United States. These were papers which even at that time could 
be manufactured bv but very few factories in thinner weights than 
30 g. per square meter. After they were included under No. 397 
(paper weighing from 6 to 10 pounds) it was no longer possible to 
make any sales and we have not sold a single sheet since then in 




WAGES IN GERMANY. 


103 


America, Ihe present duties on typewriter papers and similar va¬ 
rieties likewise render it impossible to transact any business with 
America. 

We produce thin papers more than anything else, and in this one 
always runs a risk of having them taxed as tissue papers of 6 to 10 
pounds weight, as just mentioned. We entirely agree with Mr. Glatz 
that the duty on ordinary tissue papers as well as on copying, stereo¬ 
type, etc., papers is much too high and renders business in them im¬ 
possible. At all events any increase of duty would in our opinion 
entail most serious results on our German paper industry. 

[No. 398.] 

ART PRINTING OR COATED PAPERS. 

[Pamphlet 11, p. 1085 et seq.] 

* * * * * * 

I he report of the manufacturers of coated papers to the Committee 
on Ways and Means contains comparisons of the cost of production 
of flinted papers in Germany and the United States. My firm, the 

--.—.—, does not produce these papers. Moreover, the 

paper mills belonging to the Union of German Paper Manufacturers 
do not manufacture these papers, but they are produced by colored- 
paper (Bruntpapier) factories which belong to the paper elaborators. 
I have learned that one of these firms has been asked to report on 
these papers, and I will leave it to it to correct the data regarding 
the cost of production of coated papers in Germany. 

[P. 1095.] 

I should only like to state this much, that the data regarding the 

cost of production of these papers were not furnished by_ 

-, but were published in the Paper Journal in 1902 and 

reproduced in the book entitled_,_by_ 

Wages have become much higher since that time. It must not be 
forgotten that the heavy contributions which German manufacturers 
have to make for sick, accident, and disability insurance are not 
included in these wages. 

[P. 1097.] 

The Americans thought that they had proven the cost of produc¬ 
tion of coated paper in Germany to be less than in the United States, 
and they therefore demanded a duty of 6 cents a pound on all coated 
papers. 

Under these fall also the so-called “ art printing papers ” (coated 
book paper). These can even be produced cheaper in the United 
States than in Germany. Even the basic paper is produced more 
cheaply, because it is principally made of poplar or aspen wood pulp, 
which is produced in large quantities in the United States. The 
German paper mills have to obtain this pulp from America. In con¬ 
sequence of the freight and the import duty to Germany it is 15 to 20 
per cent higher here than in the United States. The paper pro¬ 
duced from it is naturally corresnondinglv dearer in Germany. 








104 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Neither is the cost of coating higher in the United States than in 
Germany. In 1898 I studied labor conditions in United States coat¬ 
ing works which were friendly to me, and I found that the wages of 
the laborers were about twice as high, but that one laborer operated 
two or three coating machines, while in Germany a laborer can not 
be brought to operate more than one. Coated book paper can there¬ 
fore rather be printed more cheaply in the United States than in 
Germany. Consequently it is not imported there from Germany 
and would not even be imported if the import duty were reduced in¬ 
stead of being raised. The desired import duty of 6 cents is about 
as high as the selling price in the United States. German printing 
offices therefore do not have any cheaper coated book paper at their 
disposal than American printing offices. As far as the paper is con¬ 
cerned, printed works can not be produced more cheaply in Germany 
than in the United States. 

MARBLE AND AGATE PAPER. 

[Pamphlet 21, p. 2716.] 

* ❖ * * * * * 

By the ambiguous designation “ marble and agate paper ” is there¬ 
fore meant a surface-coated paper, or a coated and marbled paper. 
It is, therefore, not a product of the basic paper factories, but of the 
paper elaborating works or the colored paper (Buntpapier) fac¬ 
tories. 

As I gather from the extract, the fight is directed mainly against 
Belgium. As a matter of fact these coated papers are produced very 
cheap at Turnhout, Belgium, probably owing to the specially low 
wages. However, this paper-coating industry is also highly devel¬ 
oped in Germany. * * * 

The manufacture takes place on a large scale, whereas the Ameri¬ 
can witness assumes it to be done by hand and estimates the work 
performed b}^ a laborer in a day to be 250 sheets (one-half ream). 
The intention is very plainly to lay it on thick and make the work 
performed appear small in order to magnify the difference in wages 
as compared with the high American rates. 

I was interested to learn from the extract that this branch of manu¬ 
facture is not yet carried on in the United States. 


[Nos. 396 and 398.1 


BLUEPRINT. 

[Pamphlet 35, p. 5157.] 

* * * * * * * 

The Americans undertake to make a similar comparison between 
blueprint paper and the basic paper used for photographic paper to 
that which they make between the American onionskin papers, which 
are a paper of quality, and the ordinary thin German note paper, 
which is an inferior paper. The American factories are in a position 
to produce just as cheap basic blueprint material as the German fac¬ 
tories. However, what is lacking in the American product is the 
accuracy of workmanship and the regularity of the output. We 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


105 


should have long ago lost the entire blueprint market in America if 
the Americans manufactured their article with the same care and 
thoroughness as the German factories. Since the American factories 
have been unsuccessful in doing this they now seek a remedy by 
demanding an import duty on blueprint paper which will be prohibi¬ 
tive. For this purpose blueprint paper is to be assigned to the same 
category as basic photographic paper. Photographic paper is a 
product of the highest perfection, costs the highest of any paper, and 
but few T factories are able to produce it. Blueprint paper, on the 
contrary, is a paper of intermediate quality, being nothing more than 
a high-grade printing paper. The surface is not prepared in any 
way, as a rule not being even smoothed. The only thing that is 
required is firmness and constantly uniform quality. There is abso¬ 
lutely no reason for assimilating blueprint paper to basic photo¬ 
graphic paper with regard to the tariff, not even because the customs 
authorities might not be able to distinguish basic photographic paper 
from blueprint. In the first place the quality of the two papers, as 
aforesaid, is entirely different, and in the next place the customs 
officials can tell the difference by the price alone. Blueprint and 
basic photographic paper are much easier to distinguish than blue¬ 
print and printing paper. At present large quantities of very good 
quality blueprint paper are being produced in America with the limi¬ 
tation above mentioned, the prices ranging from about 60 to 80 
pfennigs. This is about as much as the duty on the German article 
would amount to if the propositions of the American interested 
parties not to treat blueprint as jirinting paper were to be adopted. 

[No. 398.] 

BASIC PHOTOGRAPHIC PAPER. 

[Pamphlet 11, p. 1138.] 

* ****** 

In the printed hearings before the Committee on Ways and Means 
regarding the new American tariff the most noteworthy thing to me 
is the request made of the committee to increase the import duty on 
basic photographic paper, which was heretofore 3 cents an English 
pound and 10 per cent ad valorem, to 3 cents and 20 per cent ad 
valorem. In support of the request attention is called to the diffi¬ 
culties and at the same time the expenses which were encountered 
and incurred by the American firm before it was able to furnish a 
marketable product to the trade. I wish to state that when I began 
the manufacture of basic photographic papers my factory was en¬ 
tirely reconstructed and provided with machinery which required 
extraordinarily large expenditures in view of the exceedingly diffi¬ 
cult process of producing this paper. Consequently the fundamental 
outlay on my factory was so high that it will take decades to pay it 
off. The manufacture of basic photographic papers at first involved 
great losses, as many years of experiments were necessary before a 
perfect product coulcl be put on the market. 

The American firm further mentions the great difference which is 
said to exist between the wages paid in the United States and Ger¬ 
many to machinists and to male and female laborers in paper mills. 
The figures given in the American report regarding the wages paid 


106 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


in European paper mills completely lose their value if we compare 
an American paper mill with a German factory producing the same 
articles. As this is the case with my factory, I wish to point out that 
machinists earn from 7 to 8 marks a day in my employ, besides enjoy¬ 
ing free dwelling, light, and heat. Furthermore, female laborers 
employed in assorting rags receive a salary of 8 to 3.50 marks a day. 
Then it must be taken into consideration that part of my workmen 
are lodged in houses built by me, for which they have to pay only a 
very small rent, which also constitutes a charge against the expenses 
of manufacture. 

Besides the fundamental outlay, the current expenses render the 
operation of a manufactory of basic photographic paper very costly. 

On the whole, I do not believe that the American factory is in any¬ 
wise at a disadvantage as compared with its German competitors in 
regard to the cost of the product. On the contrary, it may be assumed 
that inasmuch as its customers reside in America, and it is therefore 
spared the freight by sea and the expenses connected therewith, it has 
a great advantage over the German competitors. This shows that the 
present tariff affords ample protection to the basic photographic paper 
produced in America. 

APPENDIX. 

[Extract from Paper Trade Journal, August 20, 1908.] 

With reference to the possibility of American felts competing in 
Germany, the German duty on the article appears to be 80 marks 
per 100 kilograms, or $8.80 per 100 pounds. As the German price 
for dry felts is said to be 68 cents per pound, a duty of 8} should 
not prove a serious obstacle to competition, provided that the felt 
was made from improved wool on which the American duty could 
be refunded. On wire cloth the German duty seems to be only 18 
marks per 100 kilograms, equal to $1.98 per 100 pounds. Here, again, 
a drawback of the American duty would be necessary. 

Although much commotion was made over the prospective effects 
of the new German tariff of 1906 on imports, the real difference in¬ 
volved by the recasting of its schedules has been that manufacturers 
now pay duties averaging 13 per cent, as compared with 1*6 per cent 
in 1905, while the duties even as they stand are on a much lower 
basis than here. The average duty on hardware in 1906 was 12 per 
cent (against 45 per cent here); machinery, 5 per cent (against 45 
per cent) ; china and glassware, 4 per cent (against 60 per cent). 

Taken on the aggregate, the three groups of German dutiable im¬ 
ports pay average duties as follows: Raw materials, 7 per cent; 
food products, 23 per cent; manufactures, 13 per cent; average, 18 
per cent. 

Openings in the European markets would now be welcome in our 
felt and wire industries, toward the utilization of which the above 
details will undoubtedly prove of service. 

Aschaffenburg, February 20,1909 . 

A request was made before the Committee on Ways and Means 
(Tariff Hearings, pamphlet 11, p. 1085) by a number of American 
colored-paper (buntpapier) 0 manufacturers that the duty on surface- 

- NorrE P. F Translator. —“ Buntpapier ” (colored paper) seems to be the German word 
corresponding to “ surface-coated paper.” 




WAGES IN GERMANY. 


107 


coated paper, printed, wholly or partially coated with metal, etc., 
which has hitherto been 3 cents a pound and 20 cents ad valorem, be 
increased to 6 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad valorem; further, 
that the group “ surface-coated papers, others not specially provided 
for,” be increased from the present duty of 2J cents a pound and 15 
per cent ad valorem to 6 cents a pound. 

The undersigned has consulted all firms engaged in this industry 
and exporting to America and takes the liberty of laying all the data 
collected, together with the original letters, before the imperial min¬ 
istry of the interior. According to our own experience and to the 
communications received, the calculation of 50 reams of surface- 
coated paper which appeared in No. 39 of the Paper Journal of May 
16, 1901, and which constitutes the basis of the request of the Ameri¬ 
can colored-paper manufacturers, is incorrect and by no means in 
accordance with present conditions. Mr. August Weichelt, who has 
been out of the paper business over ten years, disclosed his former 
experiences. However, conditions are entirely different to-day. 
YV ages have about doubled, the expenditures for taxes, sick, old-age, 
and disability insurance, as well as other expenses, burdens, etc., 
which are not known at all in America, have become so high and so 
onerous that they play a role in an individual calculation which is not 
to be underestimated. In short, all will agree that a serviceable 
surface-coated paper can not be produced at the quoted price of $1.19 
per ream. 

In the report of the transactions there is a comparative table 
show ing the wages paid in America and those alleged to be paid in 
German}^ in the colored-paper industry. 

In accordance with our inquiries and our own experience we must 
characterize these data as absolutely false and misleading. In the 
following table we have indicated the wages actually paid. 

Table of comparative wages paid in Germany and the United States in the 
surface-coated paper industry. 



Wrong 
figures 
as given. 

Germany, correct wages. 

America. 

Color-machine tender. 

Marks. 

1.80 

5 to 7 marks=$l. 25 to 81.75 

7 to 8 marks=81.75 to 82.00 

6 to 8 marks=81.50 to 82.00 
3.5 to 6 marks=80.90 to 81.50 

Per day. 
81.75 
1.50 

Flint or finishing machine tender. 

1.40 

Color-room bosses. 

4.00 

2.25 

Average wages skilled male factory help. 

2.50 

2.00 



(Tariff Hearings, pamphlet 21, pp. 2716-2717.) 

A request was made by Mr. Newbery, of the Domestic Paper Com¬ 
pany, of New York, that the duty on marbled papers and agate mar¬ 
ble, w T hich are rated at 2J cents and 15 per cent ad valorem under the 
class of surface-coated papers not specially provided for, be doubled, 
his grounds being that several thousand persons are employed in the 
production of these papers in Germany and Belgium. From the 
very grounds alleged it is shown that this gentleman has no idea of 
the extent and magnitude of the sale of these papers. His hopes of 
being able to profitably employ several hundred persons in case an 
increased protective tariff is adopted exist only in his fancy. The 














108 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


actual consumption in the American market is not large enough to 
enable him to find work for a dozen persons. In all the German 
colored-paper factories put together hardly 50 persons are now em¬ 
ployed, and in Belgium not over 100 to 150 at the very most. More¬ 
over, the production of marbled papers is not so simple a matter as 
the petitioner seems to believe. It is an art which must be learned 
from youth and is transmitted from workman to workman. The 
inevitable consequence of an increase in tariff will be to make it ex¬ 
ceedingly difficult for the consumers of marbled papers to obtain this 
necessary raw material: indeed, the procuring of it would be made to 
a certain extent impossible. 

The American colored-paper factories which made the request for 
an increase in duty had to admit that the imports of surface-coated 
paper during the four years from 1903 to 1907 had only increased 
by a small amount, although the consumption had enormously in¬ 
creased in America during these years. If the importation figures of 
the year from June 30, 1907, to 1908 had been taken, or else the whole 
year of 1908. an entirely different result would have been obtained, 
and it would have been more in conformity with the facts. The 
year 1906-7 was a period when the trade was at its highest. 

It is shown clearly and distinctly from the figures of shipments 
given in various original letters, as well as in our own, that the year 
1908 showed a great slump, the exports to America diminishing to 
less than half or almost to one-third. 

The increase in the imports to America in the preceding years af¬ 
fected chiefly surface-coated paper, the present tariff having been 
practically prohibitive to a number of other kinds of colored paper. 
The production of these papers was taken up gradually by the Amer¬ 
ican colored-paper manufacturers, and the export thereof is disap¬ 
pearing from year to year. In the case of a number of kinds of 
colored paper the observation had to be made that the cost price in 
America, including freight and duty, is higher even under the present 
tariff than the American selling price, this being especially the case 
with fancy colored papers produced by lithography, and brocade or¬ 
nament, according to the table transmitted with our report of July 
•27, 1906. 

The American colored-paper industry has by no means fared 
badly unde the present tariff. Almost all the factories have made 
considerable enlargements, notably the firm of Louis Dejonge & Co. 
in 1907, which trebled the capacity of its factory at Fitchburg, Mass. 
The writer of these lines saw personally that 120 rollers for the pro¬ 
duction of surface-coated paper after the German method had been 
installed. 

In Canada, Mexico, Cuba, and throughout the West Indies the 
American colored-paper manufacturers compete with Europe and 
send considerable exports thither. 

Memorial on the Tariff Hearings Before the Committee on Ways and 
Means Referring to Duties on Surface-Coated Papers, etc. 

The tariff hearings referring to duties on surface-coated papers have been 
conducted with great thoroughness by the American Government committee, 
especially with regard to the details of the present and of the proposed rates of 
duty and with further regard to the protection of the American workman. 

However, as there was not amongst the committee a member thoroughly 
acquainted with the great variety of papers belonging to this class, the repre- 


WAGES IN GEE MANY. 


109 


sentative of tlie American manufacturers did not me.a with many technical 
objections from the committee. He could therefore make believe to the com¬ 
mittee that only glazed (flint) papers were imported to the Tinted States and 
that all the other colored and fancy papers coming under the above heading 
were of no interest to the consumer. 

The statements of Mr. Faber were from the beginning directed to protect the 
American manufacturers of glazed papers, because this line is simple to manu¬ 
facture, especially for the quick-running American machines which turn out 
large quantities, and a still higher rate of duty would soon lead to creating an 
American trust of glazed-paper mills. 

Going into the details of Mr. Faber’s assertions, all the important ones must 
be termed as contrary to facts, lie says that in Germany there are 75 colored- 
paper mills, and in the sense of his statement one should have to think that these 
75 mills manufacture hardly anything than common glazed paper for the export 
from Germany to the United States. The fact, however, is that the number of 
German colored-paper mills does not exceed 45, and not more than 6 of these 
push the export of glazed papers to the United States. 

As main argument for an increased duty, which would then be about SO 
per cent on the value, Mr. Faber put before the committee a calculation, of which 
he asserted that it was given by Geheimen Regierungsrat I>r. Carl Hofmann 
as the result of his inquiries made at the German colored-paper mills. 

Necessarily a calculation coming from such authority was of a convincing 
power; perhaps if the hearing would have lasted a little longer a member of 
the committee would have inquired about the origin of this calculation. 

The matter was then very carefully gone into in Germany, with the result of 
a long research that the calculation, termed by Mr. Faber as of the greatest 
importance, never came from any inquiry made at German colored-paper mills. 

It was found that this calculation was a private opinion. From the following 
declaration of Doctor Hofmann, affirmed before the United States general consul 
in Berlin, it may be taken how little this proof submitted by Mr. Faber can be 
applied to the present cost of production. The original of this declaration, 
which has been handed to the United States Government through the American 
union of paper-box makers, reads as follows: 


“ Consulate-General of the United States of America. City of Berlin, Empire oj 

Germany: 

“ I. Sigismund Ferenczi, responsible editor of the Papier-Zeitung since 189(3, 
declare herewith before the American consul-general in Berlin as follows: 

“ in the tariff hearings before the Committee on Ways and Means of the 
House of Representatives, Mr. H. B. Faber, as representative of the American 
manufacturers of coated papers, gave on the 21st of November, 1908, a declara¬ 
tion in which he tried to prove that in consequence of lower cost of production 
in Germany the American manufacturers of glazed papers were in a much 
worse position than the German ones. Mr. Faber supported this statement by 
*n article represented as the result of an inquest made by the publisher of the 
Papier Zietung, Mr. Carl Hofman. 1 declare to this: Neither 1 nor the pub¬ 
lisher of the Papier-Zeitung, Dr.-Ing. Carl Hofmann (who authorized me to 
state this in his name), ever have made an inquest amongst the German manu¬ 
facturers of coated papers about their costs of production, as Mr. Faber 
erroneously states. 

“ The article in the Papier-Zeitung mentioned by him has appeared in No. 39 
of the year 1901, May 16, and contains private notices of Mr. August Weichelt, 
which might then be of old date. Mr. Faber gave neither the date of the article 
nor of the notices. These apply to one single case and to one special mill. As 
far as I know, the wages have considerably risen in Germany these last eight 
years, and are in some parts of Germany much higher than in others. There¬ 
fore it is misleading to produce the above-mentioned article in the Papier- 
Zeitung as a proof for the present costs of German coated-paper manufacturers 
in making glazed papers.” 

“Affirmed to and subscribed before me this 3d day of February. 1909. 

“ Frederic W. Cauldwell, 

“ Vice and Deputy Consul-General of the United Staten of 

“America at Berlin, Germany .” 


Mr Faber asserts that the raw paper and the colors used in Germany are 
cheaper but it is a well-known fact that ordinary paper for coating purposes is 
cheaper and better in the United States than the same quality in Germany. 


110 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


That colors and chemicals are more expensive in the United States would 
appear credible, because a number of same has to be imported, with a high 
duty upon them; but Mr. Faber’s own lists prove that even the cost for colors 
and chemicals is (in percentage) higher for the German than for the American 
manufacturer. The following figures are based upon Mr. Faber’s lists: 

Cost (in percentage) of production of stone-/tinted glazed paper. 

A. United States (p. 1095) : Ter cent. 

Paper_ 34. 6 

Color_ 19. 5 

Labor_ 21. S 

General expense_ 24.1 


100 

Mr. Faber’s assertions state that in Germany paper and color come cheaper 
than in America; his lists, however, show that in the United States tiie cost for 
paper is 7.4 per cent and for color 1.5 per cent lower than in Germany. 

And the report expressly mentions that the American calculation is the aver¬ 
age of 5.000 orders calculated within three years. 

Mr. Faber says that' the American friction-glazed paper is an imitation 
inferior in quality to the German stone-glazed paper, but the American manu¬ 
facturer was compelled to the making of the imitation because only thus he 
could save in the cost of labor. 

This statement, too, is contradicted by Mr. Faber’s lists. On page 1095 he 
puts the cost of labor for American stone-glazed paper at 21.8 per cent, and at 
the foot of the same page the cost of labor for American friction-glazed paper 
is put down at exactly the same, of 21.8 per cent. Furthermore, Mr. Faber’s 
lists show the general expenses in Germany at 29 per cent; in the United 
States, however (for the same stone-glazed quality), at only 21.1 per cent. 
The American, therefore, en.ioys a saving of about 5 per cent initial costs, and 
this is easily explained by the fact that the American manufacturer is not bur¬ 
dened with expenses for sick and accident insurance, income tax. etc. 

At the end of his brief Mr. Faber gives a schedule of wages, stating the 
wages for skilled male labor in Germany at 2 marks to 2.50 marks per day; in 
America at $2 to $2.50. At the rate of 2 marks per day not even a boy laborer 
of 14 years can be had in Germany nowadays. 

It may be mentioned that surface white-coated papers of high specific weight 
have, under the present rate of duty, since a number of years ceased to be 
exported from Europe to America. 

Drawing a conclusion from all the above, it can be said that most of the 
assertions contained in Mr. Faber’s report have neither been proved by him, 
nor can he prove them. 

As regards the money-losing state of the American colored-paper mills, such a 
state can not be gathered by comparing in Dun’s or Bradstreet’s reference books 
the ratings of these mills in 1898 and in 1908; they all show very considerable 
betterments. The American paper-box manufacturers have the utmost interest 
that the duty on surface-coated papers should not be increased, but lowered. 

The paper-box factories in the United States have continually grown, espe¬ 
cially since the United States have commenced a large export trade in shoes, 
textile goods, hardware, foodstuff fabrics, cigarettes, for all of which there 
is a large amount of paper boxes required. 

The export of fancy papers from Germany to the United States has, how¬ 
ever, not only failed to grow in proportion to the increased demand for box- 
is a large amount of paper boxes required. 

If, however, the proposed rate of about 80 per cent for glazed papers should 
go into effect, the paper-box manufacturers would be the most severe sufferers, 
because, contrary to Mr. Faber’s statement on page 1087, the price of the cov¬ 
ering papers in percentage is an important item, especially with the cheap class 
of boxes, where a fraction of 1 cent must be taken into consideration. From 
a rough statistic it may be taken that, in round figures, the American factories 
of paper boxes, account books, paper toys, parlor games, etc., employ 200,000 
workmen, against 3.000 in colored-paper mills; and it may be added that the 
increased rate of duty applying also to the higher grade of gold, silver, and 
fancy metal papers would not even serve to the interest of the American colored- 
paper mills, who have never tried to manufacture these goods nor claimed 
that they could do so. even with a high duty. 


B. Germany (p. 1090) : 

Paper_ 42 

Color_ 21 

Labor_ S 

General expense-* 29 


10Q 













WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Ill 


Schedule N.— Sundries. 

[No. 410.] 

BRUSHES. 

[Pamphlet 21, p. 2648 et seq., p. 2653 et seq., p. 2743 et seq. ; pamphlet 36, p. 5339 et seq.] 

Among the opinions communicated to the Chamber of Commerce 
of Nuremberg regarding the American statements in relation to the 
brush industry, the following is worthy of notice: 

[Pamphlet 21, p. 2743.] 

The firm of John L. Whiting, J. J. Adams Company, Lew. C. Hill, 
says at the beginning of its letter that it employed 1.000 to 1,100 per¬ 
sons in its own factory, to whom $275,000 to $350,000 are paid in 
wages, including men and women. The average would therefore be 
$285.50 per laborer. Such an average wage, however, is not even one- 
half higher than the average rate paid in German factories to men 
and women. The statement that large quantities of brass, copper, 
steel, tin plate, leather, tacks, polish, etc., are used in the manufacture 
of brushes is not in accordance with the facts, for these materials are 
used onl} T to a very slight extent in brush manufacture. The chief 
materials used in the making of brushas are bristles and wood. 
Whereas the bristles must chiefl} 7 be obtained from the regions of east 
Prussia and China, all the fine woods used in brush making come from 
the West Indies, South America, and the East Indies. When the 
American manufacturers characterize the German wages as being too 
low, they seem to have in mind the conditions which existed in Ger¬ 
many twenty or thirty years ago. But even at that time they were not 
as low as the American manufacturers state. However, within 
twenty-five years wages in Germany have considerably increased, due 
chiefly to the fact that most laborers are organized and form a power¬ 
ful corporation, which has enabled them to constantly increase wages 
by means of strikes. That wages have so greatly increased within 
the last few decades is also partly due to social legislation, which 
greatly burdens both employers and employees by contributions to 
sick, old age, invalidity, and accident insurance funds. Within the 
last few years especially, however, all articles of luxury and necessity 
in Germany have greatly risen in price and necessitated an increase 
in wages. 

[Pamphlet 21, p. 2747.] 

The statements of the A. L. Sonn Brush Company do not agree 
very well with those of the firm of John L. Whiting in regard to 
American wages. The former firm gives the average rate of wages 
in foreign countries as 25 cents a day tor men and 15 cents for women, 
whereas, in reality, men earn 100 cents per day and women 50 cents. 
The statements of this firm regarding the wages paid for labor in 
America, namely, $2.50 a day for male and $2 for female labor, seem 
to be decidedly too high and do not agree with the statements of the 
firm of John L. Whiting. 

Children are hardly employed at all in factories in Germany, be¬ 
cause the social-political laws place great difficulties in the way of 
employment of children. 


112 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


The wages paid for one dozen toothbrushes are as follows: 

Marks. 


When the selling price is 3 marks-0. 67 

When the selling price is 4 marks- • 73 

When the selling price is 5 marks- . 77 


It is not difficult to see that an import duty of 40 per cent ad va¬ 
lorem will doubly and even trebly offset the difference existing in 
general between wages paid for labor in America and Germany. 
Only those kind of brushes can be exported to America which are not 
manufactured in the latter country itself. No kinds which are made 
in America can be exported to that country by European manufactur¬ 
ers, because it is impossible to compete with the American manufac¬ 
turers. We should like, for instance, to point to the flourishing in¬ 
dustry at Troy, N. Y., and neighboring towns, where cement brushes 
are manufactured in vast quantities. An European manufacturer 
could not think of exporting such brushes to America, which consti¬ 
tute a considerable part of the American brushes. It would be im¬ 
possible to export such brushes to America even with an import duty 
of 20 per cent ad valorem. 

Celluloid toothbrushes and solid-back brushes are not manufactured 
in the United States, and therefore constitute a considerable part of 
the German exports to America. 

It is true that brushes are still manufactured in certain prisons in 
Germany in order to employ the prisoners. However, the only kinds 
made there are very common brushes of inferior quality, which are 
not exported to the United States for the very reason that this in¬ 
ferior product can not pay the high American import duty. We can 
furnish proof that we have frequently been informed by our Ameri¬ 
can customers that they coidd no longer buy certain kinds of us 
because they could procure them cheaper in America. 

The various American manufacturers make such diversified state¬ 
ments in their reports to the House of Representatives regarding the 
wages paid for labor in the United States that the conclusion may be 
drawn thereform that the data were not very accurately compiled. 

For instance, the wages paid per year are given as follows: 



Male 1 Female 
laborers. j laborers. 

A. L. Sonn Brush Co... 

$750.00 1 $600.00 

$285.50 

465.00 | 270.00 

John L. Whiting (average). 

The United Manufacturers of Grand Rapids. 


The data furnished by the American manufacturers regarding the 
wages paid for labor in Europe, and especially in Germany, show 
similar discrepancies. 













WAGES IN GERMANY. 


113 


BRUSHES. 


[Pamphlet 21, p. 2648 et seq., p. 2663 et seq., p. 2743 et seq. ; pamphlet 36, p. 5339' et seq.] 

I he following is extracted from the opinions given to the Cham¬ 
ber of Commerce of Nuremberg regarding the American statements 
anent the brush industry: 

[Pamphlet 21.] 

The American wages are given as follows: 

A. L. Sonn Brush Company, Troy (p. 274G) : 

Men, $2.50 per day, or 63 marks per week. 

Women, $2 per day, or 50.40 marks per week. 

Boys, $1 per day, or 25.20 marks per week. 

Grand Rapids Brush Company, Grand Rapids (p. 2749) : 

Average wages $1.55 per day, or 39 marks per week. 

Ames Bonner Company, Toledo, Ohio (p. 2652) : 

Men, $1.92 per day, or 48 marks per week. 

Women, $0.77 per day, or 19.40 marks per week. 

Boys, $0.62 per day, or 15.60 marks per week. 

Florence Manufacturing Company, Florence (p. 2656) : 

Men, 15 to 35 cents per hour (0.63 to 1.47 marks.) 

Women, 10 to 20 cents per hour (0.42 to 0.84 mark). 

Rennous, Kleinle & Co., Baltimore (p. 5342) : 

Men, $2.43 per day, or 61.25 marks per week. 

Women, $0.78 per day, or 19.65 marks per week. 

Boys, $1 per day, or 25.20 marks per week. 

How far these statements are correct can probably best be ascer¬ 
tained by the representative of the German Government in the 
United States. 

With regard to the German wages which are compared with these 
American wages, the following statements were made by the Amer¬ 
ican parties interested: 

A. L. Sonn Brush Company, Troy (p. 2747), stated that the following 
wages were paid “ abroad : ” 

Men, $0.50 per day, or 12.60 marks per week. 

Women, $0.15 per day, or 3.80 marks per week. 

Grand Rapids Brush Company, Grand Rapids (p. 2749) : 

Germany, $0.60 per day, or 17.65 marks per week. 

Hanlon & Goodman, New York (p. 5352) : 

Nuremberg, Brandenburg, Schonheide. Totenau, 7 to 10 marks per 
week, and in some cases only 4 to 5 marks per week. 

In contrast to these statements we may set forth that the average 
wages in the German paint brush and ordinary brush factories are as 
follows: 

1. In Nuremberg: 

Men, 25 marks per week. 

Women, 12.50 marks per week. 

(Skilled laborers, 30 to 39 marks per week.) 

(Skilled women, 15 to 21 marks per week.) 

2. In Erlangen: 

Men, 25 marks per week. 

Women, 12 marks per week. 

3. In Munich: 

Men, 30 marks per week. 

Women, 13 marks per week. 

4. In Totenau (Baden) : 

Men, 21 marks per week. 

Women, 11 marks per week. 

4731—S. Doc. 68. 61-1, pt 2-8 


114 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


5. In Schonheide (Erzgebirge) 

Adult male workers, 19 marks per week. 

Youthful male, workers, 12 marks per week. 

Adult female workers, 12 marks per week. 

Youthful female workers, 9 marks per week. 

6. In Bonn on the Rhine: 

Skilled workers, 30 marks per week. 

Skilled female workers, 16 marks per week. 

7. In Bergedorf, near Hamburg : 

Men, 30 marks per week. 

Women, 15 marks per week. 

8. In Striegau (Silesia) : 

Men, 21 marks per week. 

Women, 11 marks per week. 

The American statements are therefore wrong and should be cor¬ 
rected as above. 

The complaints of the Americans regarding their inability to com¬ 
pete with the German manufactures must be greatly exaggerated. 
Thus, for instance, the Grand Rapids Brush Company admits that 
with a protective tariff of 40 per cent on English and French goods 
it still stood on an equal, basis with the English and French goods, and 
therefore asks a duty of 45 per cent to 50 per cent only on the articles 
of German manufacture, because it estimates the German wages to be 
33J per cent less than the English and 10 per cent less than the 
French. However, as is shown in the foregoing rectified statements, 
the estimates of the foreign wages by the Americans are wrong 
throughout; that is, to low. 

Pamphlet 21, pages 2665-2666. Furthermore, it is probable that the 
great difference cited by the Grand Rapids Brush Company as exist¬ 
ing between the hours of labor in America and Germany is also incor¬ 
rect, for here in Nuremberg, for instance, the length of hours of labor 
is not over fifty-four and one-half hours per week. The American 
hours of work are probably hardly any shorter, even without con¬ 
sidering the fact that, as experience shows, slight differences in the 
length of hours are always made up by greater exertion in the work. 

FOOTWEAR. 

[Pamphlet 37, p. 5542.] 

The following communications have been made to the Chamber of 
Commerce of Nuremberg by shoe manufacturers. The wages cited 
on page 5542 of the tariff hearings, as well as the statement regarding 
the length of hours of work, are not at all in conformity with the 
facts. 

The wages paid in our factories for our staple articles are consid¬ 
erably higher than those quoted by the Americans and are to-day at 
least as high as those quoted by the Americans under the heading of 
France and England. 



Canada. 

England. 

France. 

Massa¬ 

chusetts. 

Cutters. 

$1.50 
2.00 
1.49 
1.42 
1.67 
1.73 

$1.30 

1.34 

1.05 

1.22 

$1.35 

1.60 

1.25 

.77 

$2.40 
2.65 
2.28 
3.72 
3.69 
3.11 

Lasters. 

Stitchers. 

Heelers. 

Edge setters.. 

Finishers.;. 

1.30 

1.06 


















WAGES IN GERMANY. 


115 


Moreover, the length of hours which has been in vogue here for 
years is not fifty-nine hours, as quoted by the Americans, or even 
sixty to seventy-two hours, but, according to proofs, only fifty-four 
hours. (In America the number of hours is greater than fifty-four.) 

Ihe rate of wages of $1.66 to $5.23 per week, as further cited by 
the Americans, is likewise not in accordance with the facts. On the 
contrary, our workmen in these categories receive from 27 to 32 marks 
per week during dull periods, this rate being raised to 37 and 42 
marks per week when there is a greater abundance of work. 

We believe that the exaggerated daily rates cited by the Ameri¬ 
cans under Massachusetts are not understood as being paid during 
periods when the amount of work is regular, but for exceptionally 
busy periods and probably for specially fine and better paid articles, 
but not for staple articles. Besides, as a matter of fact, only the 
yearly income should serve as a criterion. 

The American wages cited, although they do materially exceed 
those paid by us (yet not to the extent stated), by no means indi¬ 
cate a materially higher cost of production among the Americans 
than among their European competitiors, for it is proven that the 
aggregate amount of all wages paid up to the completion of a boot 
is on the whole but slightly higher than the aggregate wages of Eu¬ 
rope, in spite of the higher earnings of the American laborer. 

This strange circumstance is due to the fact that American methods 
of labor, thanks to their habit of specializing, affords a considerable 
advantage over the European methods, and furthermore to the fact 
that the American laborer (this must be willingly conceded) works 
harder than the European laborer although, to be sure, his energy 
also becomes exhausted sooner. 

LEATHER. 

The Union of German Leather Manufacturers reports as follows: 

No. 1.—In general. 

Throughout the statements made before the Committee on Ways 
and Means the assertion stands out conspicuously that the German 
leather manufacturer has about 10 per cent to 15 per cent lower cost 
of production than in the United States. If this were really gen¬ 
erally the case, the Americans could not pay freight and the German 
tariff and still compete in the German market with the German 
leather industry, which is equal to theirs in quality in every class 
of goods, and nevertheless this is the case with certain articles. We 
will point out that the Americans exported 1,865 dozen tanned goat 
hides to Germany in 1907, and 2,560 dozen in 1908. As this is a 
high-priced article, the value of these American exports to Germany 
is considerable (4,300,000 marks in 1907 and 5,900,000 in 1908). More¬ 
over, in upper leathers, in harness, pocketbook, etc., leather, and in 
sheepskin leather, there have been imports from America. There¬ 
fore the above-mentioned assertion can not be correct with respect to 
all kinds of leather. 

Another assertion found almost throughout is that the German 
leather is better than the American, and that for this reason also the 


116 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


American leather industry must be protected in the home market 
against foreign competition by means of high protective tariffs. It 
is true that this argument is correct with respect to certain kinds of 
leather, as, for instance, patent calf leather and kid. It is equally true, 
however, that owing to climatic conditions the Americans would not 
be able to produce as good patent calf or kid as the Germans, at least 
for the time being. The German exports of patent calf have really 
considerably decreased. Up to 1906 patent calf was not specially 
listed among the fine leathers, and so it can not be ascertained what 
the amount of exports was. In 1907 the exports amounted to 707 
dozen and in 1908 to only 447 dozen. Likewise the exports of kid fell 
from 8,489 dozen in 1907 to 2,475 dozen. The decrease is partly at¬ 
tributable to the economic crisis. However, even if the exports of 
these two articles w T ere still less, this would not prove that the Ameri¬ 
cans had equaled the German quality in these articles. If the high 
American duties force these fine German leathers more and more out 
of the American market, it will redound to the injury of the Ameri¬ 
can leather-goods industry and the American consumer, for inferior 
American leather will simply take the place of the good German 
leather. In other kinds of leather the American is by no means be¬ 
hind the German, as is shown by the imports of American leather to 
Germany and its competition in the world market. 

Then the assertion is constantly repeated that hides and tanning 
materials are more highly taxed in America than in Germany. It 
must be admitted that the duty of 15 per cent on raw hides in 
America burdens the American leather industry. However, this duty 
is refunded on exported goods. Germany also has duties on tanning 
materials, and although chrome salts are not taxed and therefore the 
principal tanning material for chrome leather is free of duty, never¬ 
theless the chrome-salt trust in Germany has a tendency to increase 
the price. However, we must point before all else to the fact that 
the German leather industry, the same as all German industry in 
general, has a considerable burden to bear which is unknown in 
America, brought about by the social-political laws. Indeed, this 
does not consist alone in pecuniary sacrifices, but it involves restric¬ 
tions in manufacture, and both of these factors are unknown in 
America. 

The American producer, and especially the manufacturer of leather 
goods, enjoys a great advantage over the Germans in that machinery 
was introduced much earlier and to a much greater extent in America 
than in Germany. The German laborers, although themselves not 
inferior to the American, are not yet so skillful in using machines as 
the latter. 

That the German leather industry has to pay at least as much in 
freight on its raw materials as the American is certain. German 
leather manufacturers obtain over half their hides from abroad, and 
likewise their tanning materials, which are of vegetable origin. The 
only thing that can be conceded is that the wages are somewhat less 
in Germany. However, as before stated, the Americans have better 
and more machinery, as well as laborers who are trained to operate 
them, and this use of machinery certainly compensates the difference 
in wages. 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


117 


No. #.—In particular. 

Statements are not made in the tariff hearings regarding all kinds 
of leather, an attempt having been merely made to justify the pres¬ 
ent high duties in America with respect to certain kinds. We will 
discuss the following classes of leather: 

(a) Calf-leather manufactures (pamphlet 43, p. 6332 et seq.; also 
several other pamphlets in which the same'statements occur). 

The calf-leather manufacturers have, according to this report, a 
yearly value in North America of $40,000,000 to $50,000,000, or an 
average of $45,000,000. The value of the raw materials is, according 
to American figures, 74 per cent of the alleged manufactured prod¬ 
ucts, or about 33^ million dollars. According to the same authority, 
the imports of calfskins from Europe amount to about 70 per cent, 
with a value of about 23J million dollars, or about 98,000,000 marks. 
The value of the manufactured American calfskins accordingly 
amounts to about $10,000,000, or 42,000,000 marks. 

At an average value of 8 marks per skin, which, in view of the Rus¬ 
sian and Scandinavian skins imported, is a very high estimate, the 
original value of the imported calfskins would thus represent about 
12J million skins. We are not in possession of the statistics regarding 
the total imports of European calfskins to the United States, but will 
attempt to make an estimate. According to the figures before us, the 
following were the average exports to the United States during the 
last few years: From Germany, Austria-Hungary, and France, to¬ 
gether, about 2,420,000 skins. The figures for Russia, England, Italy, 
Spain, and Scandinavia are still lacking. The exports from Russia 
are partly included among those from Germany, as the German raw- 
hide dealers for the most part control the Russian calfskin business 
and sell much of these goods from Frankfort on the Main, Berlin, 
etc. Without making allowance for this, the total exports from Rus¬ 
sia to America can not amount to more than 2£ to 3 million skins at 
the most, so that the export of these skins from Russia directly to 
America is very highly estimated at 2 to 2J million skins per year. 
The exports of calfskins from England, Italy, and Spain, if, indeed, 
any are exported at all, are so small that the figures representing them 
need not be taken into account. Scandinavia can not export over one- 
fourth million calfskins at most, as the bulk of the skins produced 
there are always used in Europe. 

If, therefore, the total exports of calfskins from Europe to America 
are estimated at 5,000,000 to 6,000,000 skins per year, this number will 
represent the maximum of the exports in question, and is probably 
but seldom reached, and then only under very extraordinary circum¬ 
stances. 

An exportation of 12,000,000 calfskins, as is asserted by the Ameri¬ 
cans to take place from Europe, is absolutely impossible. This num¬ 
ber is all out of proportion to the total number of skins produced in 
Europe, of which it is known that far the larger part is manufactured 
into goods right in Europe. The American statement is therefore 
incorrect. 

As far as the purchase of calfskins is concerned, America certainly 
is. as stated in the hearings before the commission, dependent on 
commissioners and dealers in order to supply her needs of European 


118 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


skins. However, the European manufacturer is not much better off 
in this regard, for he is also obliged to buy from dealers through com¬ 
missioners or purchasing agents. The amount which he is able to pro¬ 
cure through his own buyers is very slight and is largely confined to 
the immediate vicinity of the factory. In our opinion, therefore, the 
American is in about the same position as the European manufac¬ 
turer with respect to purchases in Europe, with the exception of the 
difference of the freight by sea, which amounts to about 1 per cent of 
the value of the raw material. The European manufacturer has a 
similarly increased cost when he purchases American skins, which are 
occasionally imported into Germany in considerable quantities. 

All the statements in the tariff hearings are therefore based on data 
which will not bear close scrutiny, as far as they relate to purchases. 

Just as we have refuted the calculation of alleged increased costs 
for freight and commission on calfskins imported from Europe (al¬ 
leged to be 4 per cent of the value of the skins), we shall also show 
that the other statements regarding the cost of manufacture are incor¬ 
rect. The calculated figures for wages, materials, and other expenses 
are based on a wrong assumption. The wages are said to be 50 per 
cent and the materials 25 per cent less in Germany. The following 
table is compiled to show the alleged lower costs in Germany: 

Per square foot. 

Freight and buying expenses, 4 per cent of the value of 


the skins_$0. 0048 = 0. 02 mark 

Wages, 50 per cent of $0.019276_ . 0096 = . 04 mark 

Materials, 25 per cent of $0.013842_ . 0034 = . 01 mark 


.0178= .07 mark 

According to these assertions the German manufacturers produce 
about 7 pfennigs per square foot (equals 11.04 per cent of the total 
price) more cheaply. 

This result is by no means in accordance with facts. The cost of 
materials here is the same as in America. Although the wages range 
somewhat lower than in America, our other expenses are materially 
increased by industrial taxes, etc., and the contributions required by 
the laws on the making of provision for laborers (sick, disability, 
and accident insurance) and the voluntary benefit institutions. 

Our total cost price per square foot (value of raw material, wages, 
materials, and other expenses) is 69 pfennigs, while this price only 
amounts to 68 pfennigs in America, according to a Boston leather 
manufacturer. In both calculations the value of the raw material 
is taken to be the same. This shows that the cost of manufacture 
in Germany is not 7 pfennigs per square foot cheaper, as asserted 
by the Americans, but 1 pfennig higher. 

( b) Sole leather (pamphlet 47, p. 7086). 

That the cost of production of sole leather must also be cheaper 
in America than in Germany is evidenced by the fact that German 
sole leather has no more dangerous competitor in the world’s market 
than the American and the English. In the place indicated above, 
the firm of J. W. & A. P. Howard & Co. says that the regular trained 
tanners who work at the scraping block in sheering (scraping), clean¬ 
ing, and stretching the rawhide, earn about 25 marks a week in Ger¬ 
man sole-leather factories. This is also false. In the North German 
sole-leather factories, a large part of which figure in the world’s 







WAGES IN GERMANY. 


119 


market as competitors of the Americans, 36 to 40 marks a week are 
paid to workers at the scraping block, according to the amount of 
work performed, and not 25 marks. This would be from $8.50 to 
$9.50 as against $12 to $15, which are claimed by the said firm 
to be paid in America. In this, as well as all other heavy classes 
of leather, as well as leather in general made from hides, it must 
be taken into consideration that the larger part of the raw hides and 
tanning materials are obtained in the United States at home, while 
Germany, as mentioned above, as a rule has to obtain the greater 
portion of her hides abroad. The tanning materials for sole-leather 
products must all be obtained abroad, with the exception of oak and 
pine bark. 

( c ) Glove leather (pamphlet 47, pp. 7069-7073). 

The statement that female labor is employed in the preparation of 
kid leather which is exported to the United States from Europe is 
not correct. In Germany women are employed as assistants only in 
very rare cases in certain kid-leather factories. The wages cited by 
the Americans are not correct, for the actual wages are as follows: 

In the tannery, about $5.83 to $6.92 a week. 

In the dressing establishment, about $6.90 to $8.57 a week. 

In the dyeing section, $5 to $6.31 a w r eek. 

On page 7073 the wages of dyers at Berlin are given as 20 to 23 
marks. This was the case years ago, but now a dyer’s wages are 
26.50 marks. As stated above, the American kid-leather industry is 
of no significance as regards quality, and neither is it so with respect 
to quantity. For the simple reason of the difference in quality it 
would be unable to supply the principal part of the American de¬ 
mand. The retention of the high tariff would therefore result in 
compelling the consumer to continue paying higer prices in America 
in future. 

With regard to the American and German duties on leather, the' 
following has been reported to the Chamber of Commerce of Mann¬ 
heim : 

America collects 20 per cent ad valorem on our calf and goat skins* 
tanned, dressed, and made ready. 

Patent leathers weighing not over 10 pounds per dozen hides, 30 
cents a pound English in addition to 20 per cent ad valorem; weigh¬ 
ing 10 to 25 pounds, 30 cents per pound English and 10 per cent ad 
valorem, we having none weighing over 25 pounds per dozen. 

Calculated entirely according to the value, the duty amounts to 
about 40 per cent on patent leather under 10 pounds, and about 30 
per cent on the same from 10 to 25 pounds. 

The German duties on the same articles are as follows: 

Under No. 546 of the tariff, net weight 1 to 3 kilos apiece, 40 marks 
per 100 kilos. 

Under No. 547, net weight, under 1 kilo apiece, 50 marks per kilo. 

Under No. 549, goat and kid leather, 80 marks per 100 kilos. 

Under No. 552, patent leather of all kinds, 50 marks per 100 kilos. 

In the case of the heavy tanned, polished, and patent leather, this 
signifies an ad valorem duty of 4 to 6 per cent; in the case of the light 
chrome leather, 2 to 3 per cent; and in the better goat leathers, such 
as are exported by America, 2 to 3 per cent, and not 12 per cent, as 
erroneously stated by the Milwaukee and Boston factories, therefore 


120 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


2 to 6 per cent German duty as against 20 to 40 per cent American 
duty. 

The correctness of these statements will be shown by the following 
calculation: 

One dozen polished leather A 24 kos., at 7.10 marks, 170.40 marks; 
tariff No. 546, 1 to 3 kilos apiece. 

Forty marks per 100 kilos, 24 kilos: 9.60 marks—5.6 per cent. 

Tariff No. 547, under 1 kilo, 1 dozen tanned colored leather 100 B 
at 1 mark, 6 kilos per dozen, 100 marks. 

Fifty marks per 100 kilos, 6 kilos—3 marks=3 per cent. 

One dozen box calf, 120 B at 1.10 marks, 8 kilos per dozen, 
132 marks. 

Fifty marks per 100 kilos, 8 kilos=4 marks=3 per cent. 

Tariff No. 552, 1 dozen patent leather B mixed 5 kos., 72 marks. 

Fifty marks per 100 kilos, 5 kilos=2.50 marks=3.5 per cent. 

Tariff No. 549, 1 dozen goatskins, 60 CK at 1.10 marks, 66 
marks. 

Eighty marks per 100 kilos, 2 kilos per dozen=1.60 marks=3.4 per 
cent. 

Apparently the American manufacturers calculate the higher 
French duties also for Germany, or reckon the duties on cheap assort¬ 
ments of less than average value. 

The exports of patent leather decreased from $1,270,214 in 1900 to 
$203,267 in 1908, while the American consumption, according to the 
statement of American manufacturers, amounts to over $25,000,000 
worth of American patent leather, so that only 1 per cent of the con¬ 
sumption of patent leather is still imported to America; and in view 
of the enormous duties even this fraction would have disappeared by 
this time if it had not been that a small demand for German patent 
leather still existed. This demand can not be supplied by the Ameri¬ 
can industry, for the reason that owing to climatic conditions it has 
hitherto been impossible to produce a patent leather in America var¬ 
nished on the meat side of the leather. 

The American patent leather is prepared on the fur side of the 
hide and is produced in an entirely different method and used for 
different purposes than the imported German product. 

A comparison of the materials and cost of labor in producing these 
two kinds of leather is therefore impossible. It is evident, however, 
that it will cost considerably more in wages to varnish a hide on the 
raw meat side, since it must first be made smooth by difficult laboring 
processes, than to varnish it on the fur side, which is naturally 
smooth, as is done in America. 

All American calculations of the cost of labor are based on the Ger¬ 
man daily wages, which are not so high as the American, and no men¬ 
tion is made of the fact that the German wages have risen and are 
still rising at a much more rapid rate than in America. Thus, the 
average daily wages to-day are fully 29 per cent more than ten years 
ago. (See supplement to this document.) Furthermore, in making 
a comparison the daily wages should not be taken as a basis, but the 
cost per piece, as the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee 
himself very appropriately answered. As a result of the high wages 
the American manufacturers have introduced machine work in place 
of hand labor to a much greater extent than in Germany. 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


121 


Moreover, the amount of work which the American laborer is capa¬ 
ble of performing is greater, on the whole, than that of the German 
laborer. 

Finally, the best proof that the American cost of production is not 
higher than the German is found in the fact that American leather is 
always cheaper right in America and in duty-free England than the 
similar products and assortments of German origin. The assertion 
that the German leathers are cheaper is therefore incorrect. The 
fact that the consumption of German leather in foreign countries has 
increased notwithstanding this is due to quality, and does not change 
the above-mentioned facts in any way. 

The oldest merchants in Berlin have the following remarks to make 
regarding the cost of transportation which have to be borne by the 
German and American manufacturers: 

On page 5590, paragraph 7, it is asserted that in America the wages 
are 50 to 60 per cent and the prices of tanning materials about 
33 per cent higher than in Germany, and that the foreign pat¬ 
ent-leather manufacturers can sell the finished product in America 
about 15 per cent cheaper than the American manufacturer. With 
respect to this we are informed by experts here that the wages paid in 
Germany to tanners, parers, and varnishers amount to 25 to 36 marks 
a week of eight to nine hour days, while in the United States the la¬ 
borers in the patent-leather factories receive from $1 to $2 per eleven- 
hour day. Patent-leather factories in the United States are not lo¬ 
cated in the large cities, but partly in small country towns (Little 
Falls, Fond du Lac, etc.), where living is little dearer than in Europe, 
and partly in the suburbs of large cities (Boston, Milwaukee, New¬ 
ark, etc.), where the laborers receive less wages than in the large 
cities themselves. Extraordinarily well trained laborers receive 
higher wages in America the same as in Germany, but these are merely 
exceptions. 

The prices of tanning materials are even dearer in Germany than 
in America, since the duties on a part of the tanning woods and ex¬ 
tracts obtained abroad are higher than in America, being consider¬ 
ably higher in the case of unleached quebracho wood. An erroneous 
assertion contradicting this fact is also found on page 5548, para¬ 
graph 1. 

In a communication from the calf-leather manufacturers of Mil¬ 
waukee (p. 5547, par. 6 et seq.) it is asserted that the foreign 
manufacturers enjoy more favorable freight rates than the American. 
In reply to this our experts point out that the principal patent- 
leather, box-leather, etc., factories are located in south Germany, 
and that only a part of their raw material is of south German origin, 
they being compelled to obtain it either from north Germany, Silesia, 
and east and west Prussia, or (as is the case with the greater part 
of their purchases) from foreign countries such as Sweden, Denmark, 
Russia, etc. The transportation of the goods reaching German ports 
from abroad to south Germany is chiefly by rail, which is the most 
expensive means of transportation, and the freight by sea from the 
Russian, Swedish, and Danish seaports to New York is often cheaper 
than the transportation from these ports to south Germany. The 
cost of transportation from New York to the American place of 
manufacture is not sufficiently great, at any rate, to constitute a handi- 


122 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


cap as compared with any advantage in the way of freight enjoyed 
by the south German manufacturers. The latter must reckon with 
higher freight charges for the transportation of their products from 
the tannery in south Germany to the American market than the 
American in his sales in America. 

LEATHER GOODS. 

-reports as follows regarding pamphlet 20, page 2549: 

In the first place, we must characterize it as absolutely untrue that 
the ability to compete of foreign countries, especially Offenbach, 
is increased as compared with America by having American laborers 
and foremen hired by Germany and by having American machinery 
introduced here in order to take up the struggle of competition with 
America. There have been no American laborers, foremen, or ma¬ 
chinery introduced here, a fact which the undersigned can knowingly 
and conscientiously certify to as syndic of the Grand Ducal Cham¬ 
ber of Commerce and as president of the Union of Leather Goods 
Manufacturers. It may very likely be that some portfolio worker of 
this place who had emigrated to America returned here on account 
of homesickness or other reasons. One thing is certain, that laborers 
and foremen here have been spirited away by American competitors 
and induced to emigrate to the United States. 

Therefore neither American laborers nor American machinery and 
models are to blame for the decline in the American output, if indeed 
there has been such a decline, which we doubt. The very slight in¬ 
crease in German exports to the United States has taken place solely 
because a demand has arisen for so-called “ fancy articles; ” that is, 
those which are distinguished by greater originality, make-up, form, 
color, and material, whereby they are specially distinguished from the 
American articles, which are mostly produced plainly and in vast 
quantities. This is the principal and indeed the only valid reason for 
any possibility which may yet exist of exporting fine leather goods 
from here to the United States . 

The American expert further states that the materials of which his 
articles are produced pay 40 to GO per cent duty while the finished 
article pays only 35 per cent. This argument is also false, for the 
following reasons: The expert refers to a hand bag which he exhibits 
with the remark that the fine silk finish and the fine glass and other 
trimmings are subject to a heavy duty. This may be, but such hand 
bags are absolutely exceptional articles and are not included among 
the principal imports. The vast majority of imported articles are 
without any complicated make-up and are made of leather and not 
silk. As leather is subject to a duty of 20 per cent, the duty of the 
materials of which these hand bags are made is certainly not higher 
than the finished article; that is, than 35 per cent. The various ma¬ 
terials, such as smelling bottles, powder puffs, etc., are hardly to be 
taken into account, as their price is immaterial as compared with the 
total price. 

As regards wages, the enormous difference which the expert figures 
out likewise does not exist. The wages at Offenbach, which are really 
the only ones coming under consideration, have increased so greatly 
that they are 20 to 25 per cent higher than three or four years ago. 



WAGES IN GERMANY. 


123 


They are therefore by no means as cheap as stated, and even though 
there may exist a slight difference between the wages in America and 
Offenbach (which is difficult to express in per cent), it is more than 
offset by the advantages of the American system of labor. This sys¬ 
tem consists in a very practical distribution of work, which we are 
unable to introduce in Germany because a much greater variety of 
articles is demanded here than in the United States, where few varie¬ 
ties in very large quantities are sold and therefore an unusual uni¬ 
formity and consequent cheapening of labor exists. As a proof of 
this the fact may be cited that the principal articles of consumption 
of the leather-goods industry in the United States are produced so 
cheaply that the imports thereof have decreased to a minimum for 
many years. The protection afforded by a duty of 35 per cent has 
therefore proven to be amply sufficient, and under it so efficient an 
industry has sprung up in the United States that the German imports 
in the principal staple articles are hardly worthy of consideration. 
To be sure the Offenbach industry has opened up a small market for 
itself in America for several years owing to the taste and energy be¬ 
stowed on its goods. 

We must most decidedly contradict the statement that the Offen¬ 
bach industry, as it is accused of doing, only copies American models 
and hires American laborers for this purpose, being only able to 
compete in this way. The contrary is the case. The annual reports of 
the Offenbach Chamber of Commerce constantly complain that Ameri¬ 
can purchasers come here and buy novelties, but never send any sub¬ 
sequent orders, these styles of goods being soon afterwards produced 
in America. 

It is evident that the statements of the expert are made for the 
purpose of misleading the members of the committee, and we can not 
too emphatically protest against this by making clear the following 
points: 

1. That there has been no reflux of German laborers from the 
United States to the leather-goods factories of this place. 

2. That likewise no American machinery or foremen and laborers 
have been introduced here. 

3. That the main argument of the expert, viz, that the production 
of fine leather goods in the United States is 45 to 60 per cent more 
costly (than in Germany) and that therefore a protective tariff of 35 
per cent is not sufficient, is absolutely false and made up out of whole 
cloth. 

MATCHES. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Augsburg has received the following 
report regarding pamphlet 21, page 2782 et seq.: 

It is stated on page 2785 that matches are now imported into 
America at 23 cents a gross, while they attained a price of 40 to 45 
cents a gross ten years ago. According to our information, this is 
not correct, at any rate as far as the German match industry is con¬ 
cerned, At least the joint-stock company has never yet exported 
matches to America at 23 cents a gross, but is now exporting the 
ordinary size box at 40 to 45 cents a gross, the same as ten years ago. 

If matches are actually exported to America at 23 cents a gross, 
this is probably done by Japanese and Belgium firms, whose products 


124 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


can by no means be compared with the German, and which have a 
great advantage over the German factories in regard to the cost of 
production, owing to the employment of child labor without restric¬ 
tion as to length of hours, to the fact that the duties on the raw 
materials are low or do not exist at all, and to the absence of expendi¬ 
tures under the social laws. The German match industry has there¬ 
fore in no wise injured the match market in America. The state¬ 
ments regarding the wages paid in the European match industry are 
also exaggerated as far as Germany is concerned. 

[Nos. 408-463.] 

SUNDRIES-AMMUNITION, ARTIFICIAL FLOWERS, KID GLOVES, MUSICAL 

INSTRUMENTS, CLAY PIPES. 

AMMUNITION. 

The following has been reported to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Halberstadt regarding pamphlet 36, page 5357 (cf. also pamphlet 
21, p. 2730) : 

The values and figures given by the America ammunition manu¬ 
facturers can not be used in the form given in order to institute a 
comparison with German conditions. Nevertheless, we will cite the 
following facts because we consider them of importance in judging 
the enormous duties which the United States are collecting to-day: 

It is certain that the most important raw materials in the ammuni¬ 
tion industry, namely, copper and lead, are not dearer and are perhaps 
cheaper in America than in Germany, for by far the greater part 
of the copper, as well as lead, used in the German ammunition indus¬ 
try comes from America, and is naturally rendered more expensive 
to the German purchaser by freight and intermediate handling. 

As far as gunpowder is concerned, there is no material difference 
between the prices in Germany and America, since the German pow¬ 
der prices have been quoted very high for many years, in consequence 
of a permanent ring in which all the more prominent powder manu¬ 
facturers are combined. 

The only thing which is less favorable to the American manufac¬ 
turer is the wages paid, and we must admit that the American wages 
are about 50 to 80 per cent higher, though the wages in our line are 
by no means more than twice as high in the United States. We have 
learned these facts by a personal sojourn in the United States, and 
it is by no means in accordance with facts when the statement is 
made in America that the wages are three times as high. 

In other respects, as we said before, the figures mentioned on page 
5357 are compiled in such manner as to be absolutely useless for a 
comparison, in our opinion, and the only purpose in grouping them 
thus is to conceal the actual conditions. 

We wish to use as a practical illustration an article which the Ger¬ 
man factories formerly exported to American in enormous quantities, 
but which can practically no longer be imported into the United 
States, owing to the tremendous increase in duty. This article is 
detonating primers (used for igniting explosives), the most important 
kind of which is designated by No. 3. 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


125 


The value of the material used in 1,000 of these No. 3 primers is 7 
marks, the wages paid on them amount to 0.75 mark, or about 10 per 
cent, and we offer the finished article at New York at about 9 marks 
per 1,000. The duty collected on this article is about $2.63 per 1,000, 
or over 100 per cent of its value. 

In the case of ammunition, for instance, metallic cartridges, the 
import duty into the United States amounts to 35 per cent of the 
value of the article, and this is so enormously high that no business 
can be done over there. However, the statements of the American 
manufacturers can best be refuted by the fact that they offer their 
products, for instance, .22-caliber ball cartridges, an important kind 
of ammunition, at the same prices in Germany as they are offered 
and sold at by the German manufacturers, this being the best proof 
that it is hardly more expensive for the American to produce these 
articles than for the German manufacturers. 

The following figures will show the difference between the two 
countries with regard to the tariff in general: 

One thousand .22-caliber cartridges imported into the United States 
pay, if we wish to deliver them there at cost, that is, at an average 
of 7 marks, a duty of 35 per cent of this amount, or 2.45 marks per 
1 , 000 . 

The same article imported into Germany from America pays a 
duty of 0.90 mark per 1,000, for since the German duty on this kind 
of ammunition is 30 marks per 100 kilograms and 1,000 of said cart¬ 
ridges weigh 3 kilograms, the aforementioned figure is the result 
arrived at. In the case of detonating primers the figures are more 
unfavorable to the German article. One thousand of No. 3 weigh 
1.35 kilograms, and the German duty of 30 marks per 100 gives in 
round numbers 0.56 mark per 1,000 as the German tariff. In America, 
as above mentioned, the duty amounts to $2.36 per 1,000, or 1.05 marks 
duty on the German article in America. 

Chamber of Commerce of Halberstadt states that principal raw 
materials used in the manufacture of ammunition, viz, copper and 
lead, are probably higher in Germany than in the United States, for 
the reason that those materials are largely drawn from the United 
States, and the German manufacturer has to pay the freight and the 
middleman’s profit. 

As regards gunpowder, there is no considerable difference between 
German and American prices. Prices in Germany have been ranging 
high for some years as the result of a strong combination of the large 
powder manufacturers. 

The statement that wages in this industry are three times as high 
in America as in Germany is not borne out by facts. A careful per¬ 
sonal investigation has established the fact that wages in America 
are from 50 to 80 per cent higher, but in no case more than twice as 
high as in Germany. 

The prohibitive increase in duty on several manufactured articles 
in this industry has made it practically impossible to introduce them 
into the United States. A practical example of this is found in the 
Detonator No. 3: Cost of material per 1,000, $1.67; wages, 18 cents; 
our price laid down in New York, $2.14. The duty on this article is 
$2.36 per 1,000, or over 100 per cent ad valorem. 


126 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


The difference in duty between the two countries on ball cartridges 
(caliber .22) per 1,000 is as follows: In America, 58 cents; in Ger¬ 
many, 21 cents. 

ARTIFICIAL FLOWERS. 

A manufacturer of artificial flowers reports as follows to the Cham¬ 
ber of Commerce of Dresden regarding pamphlet 21, page 2668; pam¬ 
phlet 32, page 4673; and pamphlet 36, page 5336: 

It is by no means true that the ratio of wages is as 1 to 4, or, as stated 
on page 5337, as 1 mark to $1. On page 4687 the average wages per 
week are given as $8 to $10, but no distinction is made between male 
and female workers, although as a general rule female workers re¬ 
ceive less wages in the United States than male. We have male work¬ 
ers who receive from 30 to 35 marks a week, while female workers 
receive from 17 to 20 marks. Cases such as that described on page 
4682, in which a manufacturer paid a girl 25 cents a week to begin 
with and finally increasing her wages to $2, do not occur here. The 
custom in Sebnitz is for girls to begin earning wages from the day 
they enter the factory, even unskilled workers receiving at least 8 
marks a week at the start and being increased within a very short 
time. 

It is also impossible for us to agree with the opinion that the gen¬ 
eral expenses of American manufacturers are much higher than here. 
If a manufacturer in the United States has higher expenses than 
Germany, this is due merely to the lower purchasing power of money 
in the United States. It is impossible to see, however, why a manu¬ 
facturer over there should have a greater per cent of expenses in 
connection with his business than a German. 

KID GLOVES. 

A manufacturer reports as follows to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Dresden regarding pamphlet 20, page 1515: 

We may state, on the basis of our many years’ experience, that the 
data given on page 2523 are correct in every respect. On the con¬ 
trary, those given by Mr. Littauer (p. 2526)® are incorrect, and the 
night wages which the German manufacturer has to pay are as 
follows: 

Ordinary sewing with rounded-off seam, 1.80 to 2 marks per 200 
pounds. (Mr. Littauer says 24 to 30 cents.) 

Quilted (whipped seam) gloves (Stepphandschuhe), 4.50 to 5 
marks. (Mr. Littauer says 54 to 60 cents.) We also doubt the cor¬ 
rectness of the wages of American seamstresses and glovemakers as 
quoted by Mr. Littauer, and deem his statements to be exaggerated. 

MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS. 

[Pamphlet 28, page 3887.] 

A manufacturer from Markneukirchem reports as follows to the 
Chamber of Commerce of Plauen: 

The statements made by Mr. Pound are by no means in accordance 
with the present conditions of the industry here. They might have 
been correct fifteen or twenty years ago, but they are entirely incorrect 
to-day. 


Meant for Eux-ope. 



WAGES IN GERMANY. 


127 


[Page 3889, paragraph 11.] 

The trumpets and bugles mentioned in this paragraph are for the 
most part made in America to-day. We ourselves formerly received 
large shipments thereof, and at present, in view of the enormously 
increased wages and the duty of 45 per cent it is simply impossible to 
export any longer. 

[Page 3891, paragraph 4.] 

Although home labor still exists to a great extent in our industry, 
it is not so pronounced as it was thirty or forty years ago. Large 
establishments have arisen in the course of time, and the small home 
industries have taken on quite a different character than formerly. 
The employment of women and children can no longer be calculated 
on, since the new laws contain rather severe provisions in this regard. 

[Page 3892 et seq.] 

The facts cited by Mr. Pound regarding wages seem to be a crea¬ 
tion of fancy. There has never been such a thing as child labor at 
3 cents a day, and it certainly does not exist at present. Apprentices 
from 14 to 16 years old, who are now allowed to work only a limited 
number of hours, receive board wages of 6 to 8 marks a week the first 
year, which is correspondingly increased in the second and third 
years. The wages of 60 cents and $1 a day, as cited, may have been 
paid fifteen or twenty years ago, but now the wages for an ordinary 
laborer are $1, and for well-trained laborers, from $1.50 to $1.75 a day. 

The overhead charges are sufficiently high here, higher than any¬ 
where else. The payments for social institutions, such as sick funds, 
disability insurance, trades unions, etc., are at all events so high that 
a factory has to take this enormous burden into very serious con¬ 
sideration. 

There can be no question of an “ indigent laboring class ” and 
“ starvation wages,” such as Mr. Pound fears would be a constant 
danger to America. Except during dull business periods, where 
there are unemployed everywhere, laborers are lacking here also dur¬ 
ing normal times. The reason has been that many persons have be¬ 
come engaged in other industries on account of low wages, and it has 
also been due to this circumstance that wages were considerably in¬ 
creased in order to keep the laborers. 

CLAY PIPES. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Limburg on the Lahn has received 
the following report in connection with pamphlet 21, pages 2667, 
2757, and 2758: 

The statements made regarding German pipes are based on errors. 
For instance, it is untrue when Kurth asserts that the wages paid here 
on an ordinary clay pipe are 13 cents. The cheapest clay pipe that is 
exported to the United States costs 18 cents in wages, to which are 
added 15 cents duty, and freight and expenses 7 cents, Franco- 
American seaport, amounting to 40 cents altogether. In contradis¬ 
tinction to this the wages paid in America are 36 cents, according to 
Kurth’s own statement, but it seems probable to us that the cheap 
sorts are produced still more cheaply over there. The present duty 
of 15 cents is excessively high, being almost equal to the cost of pro- 


128 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


duction of the clay pipe. The same applies also to the better articles, 
such as cutty pipes (stummels), mounted pipes, etc., the duty on 
which is 60 per cent. The American pipe is amply able to stand the 
competition and is gaining ground from year to year. 

LEATHER GLOVES. 

The Chamber of Commerce of Altenburg reports as follows regard¬ 
ing pamphlet 20, page 2515 : 

Mr. Littauer has made statements regarding the conditions of pro¬ 
duction in Germany, which are to a great extent based on erroneous 
suppositions. It would take too long to examine into all of the details 
of Littauer’s statements, and onty a few specially important points 
will be taken up here. 

Littauer alleges that the production of a dozen pairs of leather 
gloves, exclusive of the leather, costs $2.14 (8.98 marks) in Germany. 
This, however, is not in accordance with facts, for even though this 
price may be paid in certain regions, it can not be taken as the average 
rate. Moreover, the prices for cutting out, as cited by him, are also 
incorrect. The minimum wages for cutting out gloves were cited at 
2.30 to 2.80 marks, whereas, for instance, at Munich the minimum 
wages are 3.36 marks per dozen and at Altenburg 3.10 marks. Lit¬ 
tauer further states that the leather for a dozen pairs of gloves costs 
$7 in America, including duty, a price which is by no means correct, 
as the cost is considerably lower. 

On page 2526 of the report, Littauer speaks of the wages for sew¬ 
ing, mentioning 24 to 30 cents a dozen (1 to 1.30 marks) as the wages 
for ordinary sewing in Germany, as against 75 cents a dozen in 
America, and 50 to 60 cents a dozen (2.30 to 2.55 marks) for whipped 
seam in Germany, as against $1.40 per dozen in America. The lowest 
wages for ordinary sewing in Germany amount, however, to 1.55 to 
2.70 marks, and for whipped seam to 3.30 to 4.20 marks. Littauer 
further states that a large number of German manufacturers send 
their gloves to Belgium to be sewed, because, as he supposes, the sew¬ 
ing wages are cheaper there. This statement is also wrong, for seam 
sewing is 25 pfennigs dearer in Belgium than in Germany. The real 
reason why the German manufacturers have their sewing done in 
Belgium is because a finer and better seam is made in that country 
than in Germany. Littauer’s statement regarding the dyers’ wages in 
Germany are as incorrect as those regarding the wages paid for 
cutting out and sewing seams. 

The hearings before the Committee on Ways and Means, which 
also related to the duties on leather gloves, show that erroneous ideas 
are entertained by American manufacturers regarding the cost of 
manufacture of gloves. Thus the expert, Mr." Littauer, who was 
examined on this matter, stated that the production of a dozen leather 
gloves in Germany cost $2.14, or 9 marks. However, even if this 
price (as we doubt) should be paid in individual districts, it can not 
b& taken as the average rate, but must be regarded as an exception, 
for in reality the cost of production of fine gloves in Germany comes 
to 13 or 16 marks. In view of this price, the present tariff seems 
amply sufficient to offset the difference in the cost of production in 
America and Germany. The prices for cutting are likewise quite 
wrongly given by the incorrectly informed importers. Thus, 2.30 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


129 


to 2.80 marks are given as the minimum wages for cutting, whereas, 
for instance, in Munich, the minimum wages per dozen are 3.36 marks. 
Equally incorrect are the statements with regard to dyeing. The 
assertion of Mr. Littauer that the leather for a dozen gloves costs $7 
is also erroneous, the price being much less on an average. Further¬ 
more, the statements concerning the wages paid for sewing seams 
(p. 2526 of the report) are also incorrect. Mr. Littauer mentions 
24 to 30 cents (1 to 1.30 marks) as the wages for ordinary seams, 
and 54 to 60 cents (2.30 to 2.55 marks) as the rate paid for whipped 
seams. It is unlikely that such wages are paid anywhere in Ger¬ 
many? as the lowest wages in Germany for ordinary seams are 1.55 
to 2.70 marks, and the rate paid for whipped seams 3.30 to 4.20 marks. 
The reason why the German manufacturers send their gloves to Bel¬ 
gium to be sewed is by no means because the prices for sewing seams 
are cheaper there than in Germany, for as a matter of fact Belgium 
seams cost 20 to 25 pfennigs per dozen more than in Germany. 
Mr. Littauer therefore errs in this regard also. 

GLOVE LEATHER. 

! 

-reports as follows in regard to pamphlet 47, pages 7069-7073: 

Women laborers are not generally employed in the factories ex¬ 
porting kid leather to North America, there being only a few women 
employed in very isolated cases. 

The wages paid in these factories are as follows: 

In the tannery, about $5.83 to $6.92 a week. 

In the dressing establishment, about $6.90 to $8.57 a week. 

In the dyeing establishment, about $5 to $6.31 a week. 

On page 7073, for instance, 20 to 23 marks are mentioned as the 
dyer’s wages. Such wages were paid years ago, but at present the ac¬ 
tual weekly wages of dyers is 26.50 marks. 

The American kid-leather factories are not yet very significant 
and employ no more than 500 persons at most. They have not ad¬ 
vanced to any appreciable extent in spite of many years’ efforts, and 
are not able to-day to produce an article which even approximates the 
qualit}^ of German kid. Owing to a lack of suitable and well-trained 
workmen (a large part of the labor in our special industry is per¬ 
formed bv hand), as well as owing to the considerable difference in 
quality, they would be far from being able to supply the growing 
American demand for kid leather. 

SILK EMBROIDERY. 

The following report is made to the Chamber of Commerce of 
Plauen regarding pamphlet 35, page 5150: 

At the first glance the example cited by way of calculation looks 
very innocent, as little can be said against it as far as the figures are 
concerned. However, the increase in customs duty arising from the 
proposed additions to the wages paid per stitch is quite a different 
matter and would affect those very articles of better quality (con¬ 
trary to the example cited as a calculation), in which business can 
still be done with America at this time. The accompanying samples 
may serve as a proof, in which the additions to the wages paid per 

4731—S. Doc. 68, 61-1, pt 2-9 



130 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


stitch (calculated exactly according to the stitches, Schiffli, one-fifth 
cent per hundred stitches and yards) amount to 52 per cent of the 
value, so that, adding 60 per cent ad valorem, there would result a 
total duty of 112 per cent, while the Americans figure out an addi¬ 
tional wage per stitch of 8 to 10 per cent in the example cited by them 
with regard to a very ordinary article. In the case of hand machines 
(for 20 stitches, one-fifth cent per yard) the additional wage amounts 
to as high as 80 per cent. 

Furthermore, attention is called to the almost insurmountable diffi¬ 
culty which an additional tariff calculated according to the number 
of stitches would cause in determining the duty. 

APPENDIX I.-WAGES IN THE GERMAN LITHOGRAPHIC INDUSTRY. 

I Statement regarding the increase of the import duty on lithographic work in America.] 

Out of a total of 16,000 lithographers and lithographic and photo¬ 
graphic printers in Germany, about 5,500 are employed in producing 
lithographic work for America. In addition there are about 20,000 
assistant laborers and female workers. 

When the American owners of lithographic plants state in their 
report that a lithographer in Germany earns from 32 to 36 marks, this 
is about correct on an average. The average does not even reach as 
high as 36 marks, being about 30 marks. The average wages are the 
same, however, in the case of lithographic printers operating power 
machines, both receiving the same rate and not a certain amount less, 
as asserted by the Americans. Lithographers as well as lithographic 
printers working at power presses earn as high as 50 marks in Ger¬ 
many. 

However, the average wages should not be taken as a criterion in 
the case of exported work, for as a rule only high-grade work is sent 
to America, on which are employed the best workmen receiving above 
the average rate of wages. Consequently we are fully justified in com¬ 
paring the wages of the German high-grade workmen with the wages 
quoted by the Americans. Thus, for instance, several lithographers 
in exporting firms at Berlin and elsewhere earn from 40 to 50 marks 
a week, as do also lithographic printers operating power presses and 
photographic printers. Of course these same firms also pay much 
lower salaries, but in the case of exported goods the average wages 
paid are always higher. 

To the statement that the low German wages alone control the 
American market, we can reply that the American lithographic 
worker is able to accomplish much more owing to technical arrange¬ 
ments, machinery, and rotary presses. German work, on which 
rotary presses can not be suitably used, has hitherto been able to 
control the American market almost solely as a result of better 
quality. 

In the class of work produced in America the product is materially 
cheapened and the amount of work turned out considerably in¬ 
creased by means of rotary presses, so that in spite of the higher 
wages paid American owners of lithographic plants are still much 
ahead of their German competitors in various articles. 

Our union, which has existed since 1874 and includes about 88 
per cent of all lithographic printers employed in Germany, annually 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


131 


lixes the rate of wages paid throughout Germany. We therefore 
cite the result of the wage statistics prepared in 1908. These sta¬ 
tistics include all workers in this line employed in Germany, and not 
only the high-grade workmen who are really the only ones coming 
under consideration in this connection. The average wages earned 
throughout Germany were as follows: 

Marks. 


Lithographers__!__29. 85 

Lithographic printers at the power presses_29. 65 

Lithographic printers at the hand press_27. 85 

Photographic printers_40.35 


The wages of female assistant laborers range from 7 to 18 marks 
and those of male assistant laborers from 15 to 30 marks, the latter- 
mentioned higher wages being those paid to high-grade laborers. 
The reason we took the liberty of speaking on this question was par¬ 
ticularly because our union has constantly observed the conditions 
with regard to lithographic workers for many years and is therefore 
better qualified than anyone else to determine the wages paid. Inas¬ 
much as the undersigned was chosen as the international representa¬ 
tive of the lithographic workers of all industrial nations and is in 
constant communication with the lithographic laborers of all countries, 
no doubt should be entertained as to the above data on wages paid 
in Germany. 

While willing to furnish any further information, I have the honor 
to be, 

Yery respectfully, 


The Secretary of the Interior. 

(It should be remarked in connection with the above that the figures 
given are the cash salaries actually paid, without reckoning the pay¬ 
ments w T hich the employers have to make for the benefit of .their 
laborers—sick funds, accident insurance, etc.—amounting to about 5 
per cent of the amount of the wages. In order, therefore, to arrive 
at the actual wages paid by the employers, 5 per cent must be added 
to the above figures.) 

APPENDIX II.-DIFFERENCES IN THE FIGURES OF THE AMERICAN AND 

GERMAN COMMERCIAL STATISTCS. 

The Secretary of the Interior, 

Berlin , February £0, 1909. 

In pamphlet 13 of the tariff hearings Mr. Burgess, who was ex¬ 
amined as an expert (p. 1454), refers to the great differences in the 
figures of the American and German commercial statistics—that is, 
regarding the German exports of pottery and china ware—the con¬ 
clusion being drawn that considerable undervaluations occur in these 
goods. Mr. Gerry and the importers at New York have already 
given oral declarations before the commercial expert in said city con¬ 
cerning the cause of the difference. However, the matter seems so 
important to me in view of the pending tariff revision that I wish to 
recommend that an official communication regarding the subject be 
sent to the American Government, calling attention to the following 
points: 








132 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


The figures given by Mr. Burgess are correct, generally speaking, 
but the statement is wrong that they relate to the same period of 
time, for the German statistics are based on calendar years and the 
American statistics on fiscal years. However, even if we compare the 
figures given in both countries for the calendar year 1907 (American 
imports, $5,585,580; German exports, $8,119,000), a very consider¬ 
able difference is found. This is traceable, on the one hand, to the 
fact that the final country of destination can not be determined in the 
case of exports from Germany, and therefore large quantities of goods 
figure in the exports to the United States which are shipped through 
United States ports to other parts of America (Canada, Mexico, and 
Centra] America). To what extent this is actually the case can not 
be determined from the statistics, for the reason that in the Ameri¬ 
can publications only the value and not the quantity of the imported 
china ware is given. However, the difference may be explained more 
than anything else by the fact that the American statistics are based 
on the declared value, while the German statistics are mainly based 
on estimates which are not made for each individual shipment, but 
annually for the total exports. 

Furthermore, in the case of china ware the estimate is not made 
according to countries, but the average value of the exports to all 
countries is estimated. The only exception is the china ware coming 
under No. 733 of the statistics (fancy articles, ornamental vessels, 
figures, and the like), in the case of which the statement of the value 
of each individual shipment is required. The average value of the * 
total exports of fancy china ware was estimated at 177 marks per 
double centner in 1907. In the case of the exports to the United 
States this value is estimated much lower, viz, 138 marks per double 
centner. Inasmuch as the fancy china ware mentioned under No. 
733d includes much more valuable articles, generally speaking, than 
the colored tableware shown under No. 733c, the result is that the 
average value of 165 marks per double centner (100 kilos) as esti¬ 
mated for the total exports is considerably too high for the exports 
to the United States. 

The inquiries made by the imperial statistical bureau with regard 
to 1908 confirmed this fact and showed that the average value of 
the colored tableware exported to the United States in 1908 was 
only about 98 marks. If we assume that the value of the exports 
in 1907 was, say, 12 per cent higher, and if we take this amount as 
a basis in calculating the value, it will be found that the value of 
the colored tableware exported to the United States in 1907 amounted 
to about 19.37 millions, instead of 29.1 millions, as given in the sta¬ 
tistics. The total value of the German exports of china ware and 
pottery to -thfe United States in 1907 would accordingly amount to 
about 24,400,000 marks, or $5,810,000, a sum which is approximately 
equal to that given in the American statistics. 

Similar discrepancies due to the same causes are also found in the 
case of other goods. Thus, for instance, the value of the German 
imports of anthracite coal from Great Britain in 1907 is thirty mil¬ 
lions higher, according to the German statistics, than in the calcula¬ 
tion of the value on the basis of the English estimate. 

-, Acting. 

To the Secretary of Foreign Affairs. 



WAGES IN GERMANY. 


133 


APPENDIX III.-WAGES AND DUTIES ON CHROMOLITHOGRAPHIC CIGAR 

LABELS. 

The Chamber of Commerce and Industry at Zittau, 

Zittau , February 8 , 1909. 

[Regarding the American customs tariff—Item 400 of the proposed American tariff.] 

As the royal ministry is aware, there is an important chromolitho- 
graphic institute at Bautzen which engages in the production of 
cigar-box labels. This concern makes considerable exports to the 
United States, the value of the products sold by it to that country 
having amounted to 189,221 marks in 1906, 377,312 marks in 1907, 
and 195,606 marks in 1908. 

Now, the Americans intend to make an extraordinarily large in¬ 
crease in the duty on lithographic products. In justification of this 
step, the American parties interested have alleged that the German 
wages in this branch of business are much too low in comparison with 
the American, and that the duty must consequently be made high 
enough to offset the difference in wages, for not until then would the 
American manufacturer be able to compete with the Germans. 

In reply to this, we may state that although it can not be denied 
that a considerable difference exists between the wages paid to litho¬ 
graphic engravers and printers in Germany and America, it is also a 
fact, on the other hand, that the American worker is obliged to per¬ 
form considerably more work in a day than the German. The higher 
wages paid to printers are therefore compensated to a certain extent 
by the larger amount of work finished in a given time. Then, again, 
there is hardly any difference in the salaries paid to assistants, 
although the xlmericans would have it believed that this is the case. 

Even at present lithographed cigar labels, flaps, and bands are sub¬ 
ject to a higher dut}^ upon entering the United States than other 
printed matter produced in colors. The rates of duty are as follows: 
Cigar-box labels, flaps, and bands, per American pound, 20 cents when 
executed in 7 colors and 30 cents when executed in 8 or more colors. 
This is on the supposition that no gold leaf has been used. If bronze 
is used in the colors, it counts for 2 colors. If the labels and bands 
are made with gold leaf, the duty is 50 cents whatever the number of 
colors. Although these rates may already be considered as very high, 
the lithographic establishments in the United States have proposed in 
the communications before us that the duties be increased to the fol¬ 
lowing rates: 

Rate of duty per American pound. 


Lithographic labels, flaps, and bands, printed or unprinted, printed on 
stone, zinc, aluminum: 

Labels and flaps, when executed in less than 8 colors (bronze reck¬ 
oned as 3 colors), but not including those printed on metal leaf-$0. 30 

Bands, executed in less than 8 colors (bronze printing reckoned as 3 

colors), but not including those printed on metal leaf- . 60 

Labels and flaps executed in 8 or more colors (bronze printing reck¬ 
oned as 3 colors), but those printed on metal leaf not included- . 40 

Bands in 8 or more colors (bronze counting as 3 colors), those printed 

on metal leaf not included- • 80 

Labels and flaps, wholly or partially printed on metal leaf, and not 

having more than 5 additional printings- . 50 

Labels and flaps, wholly or partially printed on metal leaf, having 
over 5 additional printings- • 75 







134 


WAGES IN GERMANY. 


Lithographic labels, flaps, and bands, printed or unprinted, printed on 
stone, zinc, aluminum—Continued. 

Bands, wholly or partially printed on metal leaf, and not having over 

5 additional printings-$1.00 

Bands, printed wholly or partially printed on metal leaf, and having 

more than 5 additional printings_ 1. 50 

Additional duty on labels, flaps, and bands, however printed- . 10 


We take the liberty of adding some comparative calculations to 
the foregoing, which have been placed at our disposal by our inform¬ 
ant in order to show the difference between the present duty and 
the one which it is expected to adopt. These show that the duty, 
which now amounts to from 31.07 per cent to 45.78 per cent ad 
valorem on cigar labels and to from 24.69 per cent to 27.75 per cent 
ad valorem on cigar bands, would be increased to from 52.56 per 
cent to 80.40 per cent ad valorem on the former and from 71.88 to 
97.20 per cent ad valorem on the latter. 

Our informant states in this connection that the present duty on 
lithographic products is just barely supportable, and that any in¬ 
crease would entail serious injury to the German lithographic estab¬ 
lishments. Our informant furthermore makes the following decla¬ 
ration : 

The capacity of the American lithographic establishments is almost unlim¬ 
ited, as far as the quantity of their output is concerned. The case is otherwise, 
however, with respect to the quality of the goods, the American establishments 
being unable to turn out as finely executed work as we can. 

The prices at which our American competitors sell their goods are, generally 
speaking, lower than those at which the German goods can be offered in 
America. From this it follows that only those lithographic products are 
exported by the Germans which are so fine in execution that the American 
competitors are not now able to furnish them. However, there is absolutely 
no prospect of competing with the Americans in the case of goods in which 
such fine quality is not demanded and which can be manufactured right in 
America. 


To the Royal Ministry of the Interior, 

Division of Agriculture , Dresden. 





























- 
















9 




















































































. 




































* 

































































